API tools faq
paste
Guest User

123

a guest
Feb 27th, 2020
326
0
Never
Add comment
Not a member of Pastebin yet? Sign Up, it unlocks many cool features!
text 108.51 KB | None | 0 0
raw download clone embed print report
  1. ElmanBeastio
  2. Decklists
  3. Feedback:
  4. MingistheKing
  5. Decklists
  6. Feedback:
  7. Drezbo
  8. Decklists:
  9. Feedback:
  10. CCalmify
  11. Decklists
  12. Feedback
  13. Lassic
  14. Decklists
  15. Feedback
  16. Elithrion
  17. Decklists
  18. Feedback
  19. Harpu
  20. Decklists
  21. Feedback
  22. Snphillips0
  23. Decklists
  24. Feedback
  25. Yomamafied
  26. Decklists
  27. Feedback:
  28. Dervish
  29. Decklists
  30. Feedback:
  31. Ryvirath
  32. Decklists
  33. Feedback:
  34. Pabzi
  35. Decklists
  36. Feedback:
  37. PMacK
  38. Decklists
  39. Feedback:
  40. TheScientist
  41. Decklists
  42. Feedback:
  43.  
  44.  
  45.  
  46. ElmanBeastio
  47.  
  48. Decklists
  49.  
  50. Feedback:
  51.  
  52.  
  53.  
  54.  
  55. MingistheKing
  56.  
  57. Decklists
  58.  
  59. Feedback:
  60.  
  61. Live:
  62.  
  63.  
  64. Dev:
  65.  
  66.  
  67.  
  68.  
  69.  
  70. Drezbo
  71. Key:
  72. Magmar Lyonar Vetruvian Songhai Abyssian Vanar Neutral
  73. “Quote” - User
  74. *Needs more playtesting to solidify opinion*
  75.  
  76. Decklists:
  77.  
  78.  
  79.  
  80. Feedback:
  81. I’m having a hard time enjoying this new format with drawing 1 at the end of the turn with the current card pool. Deckbuilding, winning, losing, and just the game in general feel very limited to me in options. You either get some good draw in your deck or you play 1 card a turn and slowly but surely gas out as you play more; this forces my hand in making new decks as well as using them in game. Factions lacking the built in draw suffer the most from this. I know that I’m probably subconsciously comparing this version with the one on live; it’s just that version of the game is all I know. More draw cards need to be introduced with varying stat distributions and mana costs that aren’t all benefitting the aggressive decks the most.
  82.  
  83.  
  84.  
  85.  
  86.  
  87.  
  88.  
  89.  
  90.  
  91.  
  92.  
  93.  
  94.  
  95.  
  96.  
  97.  
  98.  
  99.  
  100.  
  101.  
  102.  
  103.  
  104.  
  105.  
  106.  
  107.  
  108.  
  109. CCalmify
  110.  
  111. Decklists
  112.  
  113. Feedback
  114.  
  115.  
  116.  
  117.  
  118.  
  119.  
  120.  
  121.  
  122.  
  123.  
  124.  
  125. Lassic
  126. Decklists
  127.  
  128. Feedback
  129.  
  130.  
  131.  
  132.  
  133.  
  134.  
  135.  
  136.  
  137. Elithrion
  138.  
  139. Decklists
  140. In the interests of not everyone remaking the same generic decks to test against, I’m posting some. Mostly taken from Ryvirath’s tier list, CC’s Songhai list (and discord), and a few of my own (and one of Sean’s).
  141.  
  142. Vetruvian
  143. [name:My Mech Oasis (no dream)][{"id":201},{"id":20073},{"id":20073},{"id":20073},{"id":19002},{"id":19002},{"id":19002},{"id":20095},{"id":20095},{"id":20095},{"id":11017},{"id":11017},{"id":11017},{"id":20074},{"id":20074},{"id":20074},{"id":10302},{"id":10302},{"id":10302},{"id":19003},{"id":19003},{"id":19003},{"id":19004},{"id":20153},{"id":20153},{"id":20153},{"id":210},{"id":210},{"id":210},{"id":20097},{"id":20097},{"id":20097},{"id":19005},{"id":19005},{"id":19005},{"id":10995},{"id":10995},{"id":10022},{"id":10022},{"id":10022}]
  144.  
  145.  
  146. Vanar
  147. [name:CC's Vespyr][{"id":501},{"id":20144},{"id":20144},{"id":510},{"id":510},{"id":510},{"id":20149},{"id":20149},{"id":20149},{"id":20134},{"id":20134},{"id":20134},{"id":505},{"id":505},{"id":505},{"id":20160},{"id":20160},{"id":20160},{"id":10981},{"id":10981},{"id":10981},{"id":517},{"id":517},{"id":11014},{"id":11014},{"id":11014},{"id":503},{"id":503},{"id":503},{"id":519},{"id":519},{"id":519},{"id":10995},{"id":10995},{"id":513},{"id":513},{"id":515},{"id":515},{"id":20146},{"id":20146}]
  148.  
  149. [name:SNP's golems][{"id":501},{"id":20137},{"id":20137},{"id":20134},{"id":20134},{"id":20134},{"id":19038},{"id":19038},{"id":19038},{"id":20160},{"id":20160},{"id":20160},{"id":10981},{"id":10981},{"id":10981},{"id":517},{"id":517},{"id":19037},{"id":19037},{"id":503},{"id":503},{"id":503},{"id":19039},{"id":19039},{"id":10995},{"id":10995},{"id":10995},{"id":10978},{"id":10978},{"id":10978},{"id":513},{"id":513},{"id":10022},{"id":10022},{"id":10022},{"id":10204},{"id":10204},{"id":19043},{"id":19043},{"id":19043}]
  150.  
  151. [name:Ryvi Control (why is a deck with 19 2s called control?)][{"id":501},{"id":11017},{"id":11017},{"id":11017},{"id":20134},{"id":20134},{"id":20134},{"id":505},{"id":505},{"id":505},{"id":20160},{"id":20160},{"id":20160},{"id":10981},{"id":10981},{"id":10981},{"id":517},{"id":517},{"id":517},{"id":11014},{"id":11014},{"id":11014},{"id":19037},{"id":19037},{"id":19037},{"id":10957},{"id":10304},{"id":10304},{"id":503},{"id":503},{"id":503},{"id":30015},{"id":30015},{"id":30015},{"id":10995},{"id":10995},{"id":10995},{"id":10022},{"id":10022},{"id":10022}]
  152.  
  153.  
  154. Lyonar
  155. [name:Eli Combo][{"id":1},{"id":20045},{"id":20045},{"id":20045},{"id":20161},{"id":19050},{"id":19050},{"id":21},{"id":21},{"id":21},{"id":10981},{"id":10981},{"id":10981},{"id":20090},{"id":20090},{"id":20090},{"id":9},{"id":9},{"id":9},{"id":12},{"id":12},{"id":12},{"id":20068},{"id":20068},{"id":20068},{"id":10012},{"id":10012},{"id":10012},{"id":11},{"id":11},{"id":11},{"id":20128},{"id":20067},{"id":20067},{"id":20067},{"id":10022},{"id":10022},{"id":10022},{"id":17},{"id":17}]
  156.  
  157. [name:Ryvi Lyo Keeper][{"id":1},{"id":20043},{"id":20043},{"id":20043},{"id":10981},{"id":10981},{"id":10981},{"id":11014},{"id":11014},{"id":11014},{"id":20090},{"id":20090},{"id":20090},{"id":20064},{"id":20044},{"id":20044},{"id":20044},{"id":9},{"id":9},{"id":9},{"id":11},{"id":11},{"id":11},{"id":10995},{"id":10995},{"id":10995},{"id":20067},{"id":20067},{"id":20067},{"id":10022},{"id":10022},{"id":10022},{"id":17},{"id":17},{"id":17},{"id":11018},{"id":11018},{"id":11018},{"id":19043},{"id":19043}]
  158.  
  159.  
  160. Songhai
  161. [name:CC's Dedicated Fox][{"id":101},{"id":20086},{"id":20086},{"id":20086},{"id":20129},{"id":20129},{"id":108},{"id":108},{"id":108},{"id":20102},{"id":20102},{"id":20102},{"id":20080},{"id":20080},{"id":20080},{"id":10993},{"id":10993},{"id":10302},{"id":10302},{"id":10302},{"id":121},{"id":121},{"id":121},{"id":112},{"id":112},{"id":112},{"id":20168},{"id":20168},{"id":20168},{"id":19005},{"id":19005},{"id":19005},{"id":20155},{"id":20155},{"id":20155},{"id":122},{"id":122},{"id":122},{"id":20084},{"id":20084}]
  162.  
  163. [name:CC's Ladder][{"id":101},{"id":20086},{"id":20086},{"id":20086},{"id":108},{"id":108},{"id":20102},{"id":20102},{"id":20102},{"id":20080},{"id":20080},{"id":20080},{"id":11014},{"id":11014},{"id":30007},{"id":30007},{"id":30007},{"id":121},{"id":121},{"id":121},{"id":10304},{"id":10304},{"id":30009},{"id":30009},{"id":112},{"id":112},{"id":112},{"id":20168},{"id":20168},{"id":20087},{"id":20087},{"id":19005},{"id":19005},{"id":19005},{"id":19044},{"id":19044},{"id":122},{"id":122},{"id":20084},{"id":20084}]
  164.  
  165.  
  166. Abyssian
  167. [name:Eli Creep][{"id":301},{"id":308},{"id":308},{"id":308},{"id":20070},{"id":20070},{"id":20052},{"id":20052},{"id":20052},{"id":20049},{"id":20049},{"id":20049},{"id":10981},{"id":10981},{"id":10981},{"id":30014},{"id":30014},{"id":30014},{"id":319},{"id":319},{"id":319},{"id":10016},{"id":10016},{"id":10016},{"id":20065},{"id":10960},{"id":10960},{"id":10960},{"id":10995},{"id":10995},{"id":10995},{"id":19044},{"id":10022},{"id":10022},{"id":10022},{"id":20061},{"id":20061},{"id":20051},{"id":20051},{"id":20051}]
  168.  
  169. [name:Ryvi Aggro][{"id":301},{"id":20070},{"id":20070},{"id":20052},{"id":20052},{"id":20052},{"id":20049},{"id":20049},{"id":20049},{"id":10981},{"id":10981},{"id":10981},{"id":11014},{"id":11014},{"id":11014},{"id":19037},{"id":19037},{"id":19037},{"id":30014},{"id":30014},{"id":30014},{"id":319},{"id":319},{"id":319},{"id":10012},{"id":10012},{"id":10012},{"id":20065},{"id":20065},{"id":20065},{"id":20069},{"id":20069},{"id":10995},{"id":10995},{"id":10995},{"id":10022},{"id":10022},{"id":10022},{"id":320},{"id":320}]
  170.  
  171.  
  172. Magmar
  173. [name:Eli Control][{"id":401},{"id":20112},{"id":20112},{"id":20112},{"id":11017},{"id":11017},{"id":11017},{"id":10981},{"id":10981},{"id":10981},{"id":20125},{"id":20125},{"id":20125},{"id":19030},{"id":20117},{"id":20117},{"id":10995},{"id":10995},{"id":10995},{"id":10022},{"id":10022},{"id":10022},{"id":11018},{"id":11018},{"id":11018},{"id":20121},{"id":20121},{"id":20121},{"id":20122},{"id":415},{"id":415},{"id":415},{"id":19043},{"id":19043},{"id":19043},{"id":405},{"id":405},{"id":405},{"id":414},{"id":414}]
  174.  
  175. [name:Ryvi Midrange][{"id":401},{"id":20112},{"id":20112},{"id":20112},{"id":20113},{"id":20113},{"id":10981},{"id":10981},{"id":10981},{"id":11014},{"id":11014},{"id":11014},{"id":412},{"id":412},{"id":412},{"id":19030},{"id":19030},{"id":10012},{"id":10012},{"id":10012},{"id":10995},{"id":10995},{"id":10995},{"id":10306},{"id":10306},{"id":413},{"id":413},{"id":413},{"id":11018},{"id":11018},{"id":11018},{"id":20121},{"id":20121},{"id":20121},{"id":415},{"id":415},{"id":415},{"id":405},{"id":405},{"id":405}]
  176.  
  177.  
  178. Feedback
  179.  
  180. I really wanted a good neutral provoke, and I really want to stick Bone Reaper in decks, but… I kinda feel like it’s not okay to just make a better Deathblighter this early on in the game’s development =( I mean, ‘blighty is already a pretty decent card (top tier pick in gauntlet, decent pick in budget decks), and just one-upping him is kinda mean. Also, I suspect that the forum outrage would probably be worse than for any other card/change we’ve had thus far, and I can kinda sympathize.
  181.  
  182. I would like to see at least one and ideally two changes to Tethermaster, and here they are with some reasons why.
  183. Change 1: stats change to 3 mana, 1/5. Put simply, the game would have to be redesigned from the ground up before this thing sees play at 4 mana (slight exaggeration, but not a big one =D). Rejuvenator and Twilight are its natural nemeses and share the slot. Not to mention that 4 is too expensive for a card that at best contains the opponent’s threat(s) for a little while, without really changing the board.
  184. At 3 mana, something like just dropping it on a Fenrir becomes a very legitimate and interesting play. The Vanar has to decide - do they let the Fenrir stay locked up for 2-3 turns, or do they sacrifice the wolf. Similarly answers Knight, Jaxi, Third Wished creatures, Pyros, Gore Horns, etc. I kind of imagine the existence of this card at 3 mana potentially (mildly) reducing the overall reliance on dispellable effects (and esp. jaxis) in the metagame, which I feel would be a healthy thing. At 4 mana, none of these plays really make much sense since you give up too much tempo, but 3 seems like it would be a great spot for it. (I also think it would still be far from an auto-include, since it still gives up some tempo on average - people usually aren’t happy with 1/5 Knights for a current example of this stat line.)
  185. Change 2: make it dispel before a creature’s attack or non-attack damage lands. I realize that how this works is a bit ambiguous, so it may not be worth it, but it would enable some really cool things. For example, you could have a real defence against Makantor (the way I imagine the rules working) - drop Tether, and Warbeast has to hit it first and frenzy doesn’t go through. Also good defence vs any buffed creature in general, and things like Revenant that Harpu mentioned. I think this is less important than the first change, but would be cool if it’s doable.
  186. (Would be a bit ambiguous how it works with Third Wish or Bone Reaper =/)
  187.  
  188. Sorry, I think I broke Ruby Rifter XD See, what you do is play the absolute stalliest Vanar deck you can find (which is pretty stally!), maybe put in a few Aethers, and so then you somehow make it to 7 mana. And then you play Ruby Rifter-Polarity-Dreamgazer replace(-attack for 12), and attack anything whatsoever with your general for 26 total face damage. And then you win the game.
  189.  
  190. Don’t really have useful opinions on most of replace month, except Dreamgazer.
  191. (To put this in context: I don’t really play face decks, and I have low faith in face decks in general. So what Pabzi said may also be true at the same time, but…)
  192. I think it’s tricky to use correctly. I think it’s not a tempo play - I wouldn’t just idly replace it just because it’s in my hand. I think it’s a swarm play - you play it when your opponent is already busy clearing stuff to help something stick (so play it when there’s a 2/1 they can attack with their general so one thing will survive, not when they would otherwise just idly hit into a 2/3), and you play it in a deck that can take advantage of swarming (abyss, vanar, warsurge/weenie lyonar, oasis vetruvian), and when you can exploit it instantly/next turn. It’s also not an opening hand keep, I think since you can’t exploit swarming from the opening hand and it’s too low pressure.
  193. In that context, I think it ranges from playable to very strong. The times I played it in Abyss, it got cleared pretty easily, but was still a little helpful for swarming. In Oasis Vet, it felt great, though. Basically gives you a free 2/5 on Oasis turn (also the deck tends to flood with cards to some extent, so a super-low-drop is very affordable, card-count-wise).
  194. I think the Synja combo is also legitimate as a supplementary use for late game (more reason to just hold Dreamgazer for important turns), though I haven’t tried it.
  195. Oasis list (not very refined):
  196. [name:Test Oasis][{"id":201},{"id":20073},{"id":20073},{"id":20073},{"id":20095},{"id":20095},{"id":20095},{"id":20074},{"id":20074},{"id":20074},{"id":11022},{"id":11022},{"id":11022},{"id":10981},{"id":10981},{"id":10981},{"id":10302},{"id":10302},{"id":10302},{"id":19037},{"id":19037},{"id":19037},{"id":20153},{"id":20153},{"id":20153},{"id":10012},{"id":10012},{"id":210},{"id":210},{"id":210},{"id":20097},{"id":20097},{"id":20097},{"id":10995},{"id":10995},{"id":10022},{"id":10022},{"id":10022},{"id":11018},{"id":11018}]
  197. Not too sure about Keeper (replace with Synja perhaps?)
  198.  
  199. Mist Dragon Seal seems much much worse than Jux now - especially because Jaxi is a thing. One of the players will very commonly have Jaxi out for Jux to be a free Repulsor (+mini-jax removal, if it’s enemy). On top of that, the two enable very similar plays, with the difference being one gives +1/+1, while the other allows some cleverer things and Jaxi abuse. Not really sure nerfing one without the other really makes sense, as it may just reduce diversity and lead to a straight substitution of MDS → Jux with no other changes (I mean, there will be other changes because of the other changed cards, but no other changes because of this particular change).
  200.  
  201.  
  202.  
  203.  
  204.  
  205.  
  206.  
  207.  
  208.  
  209.  
  210.  
  211.  
  212.  
  213.  
  214.  
  215.  
  216.  
  217.  
  218.  
  219.  
  220.  
  221.  
  222.  
  223.  
  224. Harpu
  225.  
  226. Decklists
  227.  
  228. Feedback
  229.  
  230.  
  231. Lyonar :
  232.  
  233. Magmar :
  234.  
  235. Vanar :
  236.  
  237. Abyssian :
  238.  
  239. Songhai :
  240.  
  241. Vetruvian :
  242.  
  243. Neutral :
  244.  
  245.  
  246.  
  247.  
  248.  
  249.  
  250. Snphillips0
  251.  
  252. Decklists
  253.  
  254.  
  255.  
  256. Feedback
  257. I very strongly believe two core mechanics should be changed, both for the current health of the game and to future-proof it and open up design space: Ranged and Structure.
  258.  
  259. Ranged:
  260. Unlimited-radius Ranged in a game where minions can be protected via positioning and made efficiently powerful via buffs is inherently oppressive. We’ve seen over and over how dangerous it becomes, from Jax+Razorback, Jax+3rd Wish, Heartseeker+KE, Cyclone+Shadows, Vale Hunter+Solitude, Vale Hunter+Deathfire, and Jaxi in general.
  261.  
  262. The argument usually goes, you can always draw ranged removal, but as has been proven time and again as the meta fixates on these combos, the inconsistency of needing to draw a specific card that frequently is also needed for other threats throughout the match, particularly when it’s frequently an early-game strategy (little time to cycle your deck, answers become inefficient, etc) and when different factions have wildly different difficulties in doing so, makes that “balancing” effectively null.
  263.  
  264. A frequently suggested change is to limit the radius of Ranged, either to all the same number of tiles or differing numbers based on the strength of the minions. This I know was actually the original form of the keyword, and I both understand and completely agree with the reasons for changing it -- reducing cognitive load, etc. It’s been generally accepted that the inherent danger of oppression this creates is worth the elegance and fun of the mechanic. However, I believe there is an option that maintains that elegance while solving -- or at least, softening -- that danger:
  265.  
  266. “Ranged [May attack any tile; May not move and attack outside of melee in the same turn]”.
  267.  
  268. What this accomplishes is to turn defensive maneuvering and attacking into a decision. Placing a Ranged minion in a defensive position still gives you a couple turns of unrestricted attacking, exactly as strong as before, but it also allows the opponent to place a clock on that: by chasing it down, not only does she guarantee that the minion will eventually be caught (as is the case currently), but the Ranged owner cannot simultaneously extend that clock by running that minion away *and* continue to get free (because it is inherently free) value out of it.
  269.  
  270. So, this mechanic slows down the Ranged minion such that it becomes realistic that an opponent can get close enough to efficiently deal with said minion, making getting the inherently powerful value out of that minion more of a tactical challenge as well as adding the “soft counter” options (in this case, simply chasing it down; in most other cases, minion trading) that all sub-6 cost cards and combos should have.
  271.  
  272. And finally, this opens up design space by making buffs less dangerous -- you still have to consider the magnification Ranged provides, but it certainly softens the overall rules involved -- but it also allows you to make more Ranged minions that are both interesting and viable, because there’s a baked-in counter that ensures it won’t snowball out of control in a way significantly differently than any card is in danger of.
  273.  
  274. Structure
  275. “How to buff Obelysks” is again one of the most common topics of discussion not only on the forums and Discord, but among the Clubhouse members as well. It’s generally accepted that their inability to gain attack or move combine to give them too many weaknesses to be playable, ranging from being easily traded away to being stolen via Zen’rui to being vulnerable to virtually every form of removal in the game. However, they are an absolutely fascinating design that people adore, and want desperately to make work. And of course the flipside to all that is that making them too viable is risky -- the continual pressure they exert over time could easily become centralizing if left unchecked.
  276.  
  277. So, most solutions tend to be imperfect. Simply adding health reduces the soft counter of trading into them, something that, given their general low cost and potential for ubiquity, absolutely must be preserved as the primary form of dealing with them, while also leaving the disproportionate weakness to removal and dispel. Giving them stronger effects makes them even more swingy, such that the few times you can’t deal with them unpleasantly punishing. Letting them gain attack or movement through buffs is inconsistent with the lore and only solves the issues in a few niche scenarios. Etc etc.
  278.  
  279. The best, or really only, solution I can think of is creating a new category of card for them: Structure. This accomplishes a multitude of benefits, really only limited by where you want to limit it. Primarily, this lets you decide which spells are able to target them (if it were me, it would almost exclusively be direct damage spells) and stop the stealing of them via Zen’rui. However it also prevents most health buffing, making trading into them consistent and reliable. Combined, it is my opinion that this makes Obelysks both viable and perfectly fair.
  280.  
  281. But that’s not the only reason to make this change. It is a genuine new player problem, as well as old player annoyance, that these cards violate core minion rules and yet are treated as minions by most of the game. Players look at them, read the “Structure” tag, and make the (completely normal and expected and obvious) assumption that they are different from minions, and then when they find out otherwise it is deeply frustrating. And on the other side (to a slightly lesser degree), when they find out they’re treated like minions by all removal, they make the (again, completely understandable) assumption that all spells will treat them that way. So, they cast a buff on them, nothing happens, and again this frustrates them. As such, creating a separate category for structures not only makes intuitive sense from a lore standpoint, but also clears up a significant consistency problem in the ruleset.
  282.  
  283. And then on top of that, it opens up design space not just for future Obelysks but also for future structure-like cards in general. It gives you a whole new vector for designing aura-granting or continual-value cards. For these cards, it lets you balance and create along new and totally different lines. And it adds variety to the game in a way that’s intuitive (people naturally understand the concept of structures, as well as just categories being different in general -- no one complains why Martyrdom can’t kill a general or an artefact, after all) and therefore adds less cognitive load than the current complication created by violating otherwise consistent rules.
  284.  
  285. And finally, the changes to actual gameplay are sufficiently subtle as to make an extremely smooth transition, with little to no actual confusion even for players who never read patch notes at all. After all, they will effectively be played in the exact same way -- they’ll just be generally better and fairer.
  286.  
  287. This one honestly feels like an exclusively positive change, like it has absolutely no downsides compared to the current state (which is in contrast to the Ranged change; I obviously think that one’s important/critical, but i can see arguments against that I just disagree with). So, if the dev team or any member of Clubhouse can think of a reason to not implement it, please please please actually talk to me and tell me what they are.
  288.  
  289.  
  290.  
  291.  
  292.  
  293.  
  294.  
  295.  
  296.  
  297.  
  298.  
  299.  
  300.  
  301.  
  302.  
  303.  
  304.  
  305.  
  306.  
  307.  
  308.  
  309.  
  310.  
  311.  
  312. Yomamafied
  313.  
  314. Decklists
  315.  
  316. Feedback:
  317. Nightsorrow Assassin: The new OG is very nice and feels amazing to use. Gaining tempo in the early game was one of Abyssian’s biggest problems. The body of Nightsorrow, however, I feel could be changed. I may be able to clear a minion, but the enemy general can kill the Nightsorrow for free on the following turn effectively giving me zero board presence as a 3/1. I feel like a 3/3 or 2/3 body would work well with this card to help it give Abyssian a better start in the early portions of the game.
  318.  
  319.  
  320.  
  321.  
  322.  
  323.  
  324.  
  325.  
  326.  
  327.  
  328.  
  329.  
  330.  
  331.  
  332.  
  333.  
  334.  
  335.  
  336.  
  337.  
  338.  
  339.  
  340.  
  341.  
  342.  
  343.  
  344.  
  345.  
  346.  
  347.  
  348.  
  349.  
  350.  
  351. Dervish
  352.  
  353. Decklists
  354. Vetruvian
  355.  
  356. [name:monthly and replace][{"id":201},{"id":20073},{"id":20073},{"id":20073},{"id":10993},{"id":10993},{"id":10993},{"id":11022},{"id":11022},{"id":11022},{"id":10981},{"id":10981},{"id":10981},{"id":20099},{"id":20099},{"id":20153},{"id":20153},{"id":20153},{"id":20097},{"id":20097},{"id":20097},{"id":11020},{"id":11020},{"id":11020},{"id":10995},{"id":10995},{"id":10995},{"id":11019},{"id":11019},{"id":11019},{"id":11024},{"id":11024},{"id":11024},{"id":11018},{"id":11018},{"id":11018},{"id":220},{"id":220},{"id":220},{"id":11021}]
  357.  
  358. Lyonar
  359. [name:Keeper of the hollow midrange lyonar][{"id":1},{"id":20043},{"id":20043},{"id":20043},{"id":10981},{"id":10981},{"id":10981},{"id":11014},{"id":11014},{"id":20090},{"id":20090},{"id":20090},{"id":20064},{"id":20064},{"id":9},{"id":9},{"id":9},{"id":20068},{"id":20068},{"id":11},{"id":11},{"id":11},{"id":10995},{"id":10995},{"id":10995},{"id":20067},{"id":20067},{"id":20067},{"id":10022},{"id":10022},{"id":10022},{"id":11024},{"id":11024},{"id":11024},{"id":17},{"id":17},{"id":17},{"id":11018},{"id":11018},{"id":11018}]
  360.  
  361. Feedback:
  362. Wings of Paradise: My favorite card so far since I started giving feedback. I’m glad the cost was reduced because it’s a contender for a 3 drop in Vetruvian. With cards like First Wish/Oasis/Third Wish and cards like Aethermaster to help pump it up faster. It’d be cool if it wasn’t so fragile but most people wouldn’t mind investing a turn to keep it alive.
  363.  
  364. Hollow Grovekeeper: Neat card that helps deal with provokes/frenzy minions. Will make games interesting when you play a Hollow Grovekeeper and your opponent plays a Hollow Grovekeeper to eat your Hollow Grovekeeper. I also like Elithrions suggestion for allowing you to eat friendly minions. Haven’t been able to use its effect yet because my opponents have been usually playing Abyss. Though I think it’d be a pretty swingy card that contests with Vale in the 5 core slot, which is something I’m happy about.
  365.  
  366. White Widow: This card is awesome with Aethermaster or multiple Aethermasters and multiple White Widows. The stats and cost are fine and the effect can be controlled which is nice.
  367.  
  368.  
  369.  
  370.  
  371. Ryvirath
  372.  
  373. Decklists
  374.  
  375. Feedback:
  376. Current feedback:
  377. Lyonar:
  378. Currently I am concerned for the future of Lyonar, they have received no changes and while they have a sturdy foundation to work from the changes to nightsorrow assassin and the inception of Grovekeeper along with the nerf to keeper have left Lyonar in a spot where it will get heavily and potentially consistently punished for playing it’s key minions being both silverguard knight and ironcliffe guardian leaving them in a position where they take massive losses for it, especially in regards to Grovekeeper because of how inherently strong trading their ironcliffe for your grove is to instantly force an answer or be frenzied.
  379. Grove because of its stats nerf may not be played across every deck but it is a worrying trend for Lyonar that they are getting a card that hard counters this much, I don’t specifically want to see any buffs to Lyonar, least of all to either of those cards, I would like to see future releases that help expand Lyonars available avenues of play however to lessen the blow that a card like Grovekeeper represents.
  380.  
  381.  
  382.  
  383.  
  384. Vetruvian:
  385. Vetruvian has undergone alot of changes and still maintained it’s dominance specifically in tournaments largely due to it’s consistent mechanics and powerful effects that allowed them to dominant through power turns, with the change to third wish this is now all but gone, current Vet is in a sad spot power wise, I’d put them in the lowest eschalon of power across all factions, dervishes are simply not consistent enough, their other minions not powerful enough and artifacts are too easily countered, the Portal Guardian and Stars fury nerf both served to lower vets power but now that Third Wish is being moved to a dervish only card most of vets viable cards are looking very thin, without any true big power play that is afforded to the other factions now.
  386.  
  387. I would like to see Vet receive some buffs in the form of more playable minions, their spells are fine but they lack any true synergies outside of dervishes and their dervishes are mostly lackluster, as far as buffs go the buffs I’d like to see at least some of them implimented are:
  388. All obelysks gain Armor 1(whenever this structure takes damage reduce that damage by 1)
  389. Stars Fury: Cost back to 4
  390. Imperial Mecahnist: Stats changed to ¾
  391. Portal Guardian: Health to 7
  392.  
  393.  
  394. Vanar:
  395. Vanar is currently dominanting across multiple areas, they have the strongest early drops, they have the best removal spells and with future releases they have both Blood Taura and Ruby Rifter as game closers, the nerf to twilight sorcerer is a step in the right direction for the health of the game as a whole, however Vanar’s current dominance is primarily due to it’s ability to completly negate any form of midrange or late game style through Hailstone while still allowing them to play their own creatures for tempo.
  396. Against Vanar it is sucidie to play any creature that costs over 4 if it dosn’t have a strong og or if it dosn’t have rush, while I am fine with Hailstone being in the game I am not okay with it being such a ridiculously strong control card while still playing as a tempo card with little to no real downside, it denys buffs, dying wishes, resets the board and resets the cost of play all for 2 mana. I would like to see:
  397. Hailstone barrier: Cost raised to 3
  398. I believe this will lead to a healthier meta game where players need to make smart deceisons based on if they hailstone rather than doing it to any creature 3+cost for insane value and tempo.
  399.  
  400. Single cards:
  401.  
  402. Provoke Month:
  403. War Talon: War talon currently is a good begginers card that is a bridge between just starting out and having a proper collection, it won’t see play in any competitive aspect, it’s simply too mana inefficient for that but it should see play in newer players decks as a large drop that can introduce them to how large drops work in this game along with how powerful both frenzy and provoke are, in it’s current state I think it’s fine, with that being said it could stand to receive a small attack increase to make it a more viable option for newer players, regardless if it gets changed or not the card serves it’s purpose as a teaching tool for new players and gives them another option for a late game creature with which to play with.
  404.  
  405. Tethermancer: Currently Tethermancer is a terrible card, more than likely one of the worst in the game, it will see little to no play in it’s current iteration, it simply costs too much for a weak provoke effect with a potential of dispelling more than likely one relevant card before it dies.
  406. It does need a buff in either a cost reduction or a stat increase, I would be hesitant to overbuff though as this card does have the potential to completly dominante a game if it became too strong both shutting down effects and holding the line simultaneously can be very powerful, changes wise I would like to see either:
  407. Atk rasied to 2
  408. or cost down to 3, health changed to 5
  409. I don’t think either of these changes will make it a powerhouse card nor even a normal include, it simply makes it a viable card in some situations rather than being a detriment to play at all stages of the game like it currently is.
  410.  
  411. Grovekeeper: Grovekeeper is “Protection from Lyonar” currently, it’s bad in every other matchup most times only being able to potentially consistently hit Bonereaper if the card becomes an auto include like it is shaping up to be, but otherwise it can only hit a random sword of mechazor, warbeast etc occasionally, inconsistent and not that large of a threat, against Lyonar however the card dominates them completely and shuts down any semblance of a game plan that Lyonar would like to put forward currently, the random drops that it can occasionally hit may allow it to be a random tech in a large variety of decks, with its stats lowered it is no longer auto include but it serves as a punishment tool vs Lyo while still having presence as a possible threat for the other factions through random hits.
  412.  
  413. Bone reaper: Bone reaper is currently more than likely an auto include or a near enough to make no matter, it’s effectivness is never bad though it is reliant on the current meta, in an aggro meta full of lower drops it’s one of the most effective cards in the game, in a midrange meta it is still extremely strong while not quite optimal and even in a late game meta where it would not be as favored as we start getting the bigger bodies on the board it can still find a home because of an instant dmg proc always being relevant.
  414.  
  415. The card is at the worst never bad and at the best completely destroys, it is not however meta warping in that it is an inherently defensive card so while it may be an auto include it should not cause the meta or the game as a whole to suffer any negative toxicity from a player experience side as old Lantern Fox did or as third wish does currently.
  416.  
  417.  
  418.  
  419.  
  420. Updates for 16/02/20
  421.  
  422. With the nearing release of the neutrals I wanted to do another once over for them.
  423.  
  424. Bonereaper:
  425. Bonereaper has proven to be an interesting card, when it was dealing damage to generals it was far and above one of the best cards in the game, giving an aggressive tempo card, then it only hit minions, a steep nerf in its power but it still found itself among the majority of decklists we tested, three damage is a key number against a variety of things and its the reason we are no longer seeing tempest played very much is due to the low nature of the impact of 2 dmg, so when bonereaper became a 2/9 it’s power shrunk significantly, as it stands the card is fully serviceable but isnt particularly impressive.
  426.  
  427. Results of latest version: The latest version of it as a 2/9 does a couple things to the meta, first off it once again promotes the 3 hp cut off point most things strive to have namely towards a card like fenrir where you would not go incredibly negative against a hailstone because 3 dmg was very relevant and it was a trade off of resources at this point. Now that aspect is gone, 2 dmg is far more insignificant and we should see a rise in Vanar popularity once again or at the least a steady amount of play that we’ve seen on live.
  428. Secondly it now loses out to zen rui a card we have been seeing more and more play of as of late due to the way the game has been progressing, especially when it comes to the other nerfs that go live with this card, zen’rui will be a massive power card and should be a focal point of a majority of decks for the large tempo swing it provides especially when it can steal something like a 2/9, this should result in potentially a large number of decks dropping this card altogether because it now becomes a psuedo worse archon in a large majority of situations.
  429.  
  430. As far as positives for the card go, it’s incredibly good in the lyonar matchup, it muddys up their offensive aggression though it no longer breaks arclyte procs which is a concern, it also is very strong in the songhai matchup due to the lower ping damage still being relevant vs songhai minions, and it also should still see favorable play vs abyssian though that isnt saying much currently.
  431.  
  432. Summary: Bonereapers current state is actually in a fairly bad spot playability wise, it loses to zen rui, dosnt put enough damage on the board to hamper vanar and overall is a liability as far as a six drop goes, if it dosnt get killed or displaced it can have a large impact on the board but more often than not it’ll take a back seat to better six drops currently.
  433.  
  434.  
  435.  
  436. Hollow Grovekeeper:
  437.  
  438. Grovekeeper has been an interesting card, because it inherently is swingy in how effective it is based on the opponent's deck composition and their faction, against songhai, abyssian and vanar the card does virutally nothing and sits dead in your hand pleading with you to have a purpose, against mag it can nail the odd warbeast here or there, likewise vs vet it can hit a variety of odd ball cards to find some purpose and against lyonar it is the be all end all of hard counters shutting down both ironcliffe guardian and silverguard knight, not to mention Elyx if someone was silly enough to play that with this threat looming.
  439.  
  440. With that in mind this card is currently a limiter of power for lyonar, it hard gates lyonar from ever being completly dominant because it is a clear sideboard/maindeck card that completly destroys their gameplan and momentum, while being just useable enough in other matchups to warrant it should Lyonar become too powerful, beyond that however the card shouldn’t really see play unless we get sideboards with a bo3 system.
  441.  
  442. Summary: Grovekeeper is serviceable for what it is meant to do and hits just enough targets outside of Lyonar for it to be a worthy inclusion should Lyonar ever get to become too dominant, it’s a hard limiter on one factions power, nothing less, nothing more.
  443.  
  444.  
  445.  
  446. Tethermancer: This card has seen no changes as of yet, and should it not see any changes will be one of the worst cards in the game, it simply has no place in the meta game, it’s too slow, it’s not impactful and it barely does much of anything before dying, it’s supposed to be an annoying card that slows the opp down but it simply costs too much and dies too easily for that to be a realistic goal for the card, as it is it is a neat concept card that will fall flat in playability.
  447.  
  448. Summary; it sucks.
  449.  
  450.  
  451. War Talon:
  452. War talon is a great begginer card that can be used as a teaching tool to allow players just starting out to try out different abilities and see how bigger cards function in the world of Duelyst, it could stand to receive a small buff specifically to it’s atk value but otherwise it’s a fine teaching tool that should be dropped from decks when other cards become available but is perfectly fine before that point.
  453.  
  454.  
  455.  
  456.  
  457.  
  458.  
  459.  
  460.  
  461.  
  462.  
  463.  
  464.  
  465.  
  466.  
  467.  
  468.  
  469.  
  470.  
  471.  
  472.  
  473.  
  474.  
  475.  
  476.  
  477.  
  478. Pabzi
  479. Decklists
  480.  
  481. Songhai : Spellhai (to be revised)
  482. [name:Squad Name][{"id":101},{"id":20086},{"id":20086},{"id":20086},{"id":20129},{"id":20129},{"id":20085},{"id":20085},{"id":20085},{"id":108},{"id":108},{"id":108},{"id":20080},{"id":20080},{"id":20080},{"id":11022},{"id":11022},{"id":11022},{"id":11014},{"id":11014},{"id":11014},{"id":20102},{"id":20102},{"id":20102},{"id":20081},{"id":20081},{"id":20081},{"id":121},{"id":121},{"id":121},{"id":10304},{"id":10304},{"id":20168},{"id":20168},{"id":122},{"id":122},{"id":122},{"id":11008},{"id":11008},{"id":20084}]
  483.  
  484. Vanar: Vanar Zoo (with Ruby Rifter, Dreamgazer and Polarity as PLAN B)
  485.  
  486. [name:][{"id":501},{"id":20150},{"id":20150},{"id":20144},{"id":20144},{"id":510},{"id":510},{"id":20137},{"id":20137},{"id":20134},{"id":20134},{"id":20134},{"id":11022},{"id":11022},{"id":11022},{"id":20160},{"id":20160},{"id":20160},{"id":10981},{"id":10981},{"id":10981},{"id":11014},{"id":11014},{"id":11014},{"id":19037},{"id":19037},{"id":19037},{"id":503},{"id":503},{"id":503},{"id":10995},{"id":10995},{"id":10995},{"id":513},{"id":513},{"id":11028},{"id":11028},{"id":11028},{"id":11027},{"id":11027}]
  487.  
  488.  
  489. Feedback:
  490. Wings of Paradise (1/10/2016, before the changes)
  491.  
  492. Recommended Faction: Songhai / Vetruvian
  493.  
  494. Impact in the ladder: Card will see play in Songhai and Vetruvian Lists
  495.  
  496. Impact in the Gauntlet: Above average pick.
  497.  
  498. Summary
  499. The way I see it, this is a suicide minion that’s meant to be activated the turn it’s summoned in order for it to deal a high amount of damage to the enemy general (pre-provoke). The +2 attack stacking buff ability and the flying ability complement each other quite nicely as that makes it all the easier for the minion to deal its damage to anywhere on the battlefield. It’s powerful buffing ability is quite potent and it reminds me a lot of Araki Headhunter (It can get out of hand quite quickly) but with a variable restriction. However, Wings of Paradise can easily bypass Its own once per turn restriction and increase its playability and impact by the help of other friendly Aethermasters.
  500.  
  501. Minion Strategy
  502.  
  503. The 3 mana cost for 3*/2 variable stats are reasonable and playable because of flying. Depending on the situation, a player can decide to summon it to an area away from harm and then replace the maximum amount of cards available in order to receive a buffed minion to attack with next turn (provided it lives and no enemy dispel or transform). The alternative strategy is to wait until the player has a Wings of Paraidse in their hand and a few other spells that consist of activating and stat buffing before summoning it. Currently, the only factions that are able to force activate minions during their own turn are Songhai, Magmar and Vanar.
  504.  
  505. Deck Strategy
  506.  
  507. Out of all the 3 factions mentioned, Songhai proved to be the faction with the right amount of activation, buffing spells and “backup plans” to make full use of this minion. It’s no surprise that this minion will require an entire deck built around it. But Songhai decks have the room to include a couple of Mogwai’s, Aethermasters and Dreamgazers to improve their card draw, replace capabilities and board presence while still relying on their other faction cards to seal the game. However, I foresee Vetruvian players opting to use this card as well. The Vetruvian faction currently has no way to activate minions but they do have powerful buffing spells such as 1st and 3rd wish. The synergy of Flying and Blast is quite devastating and the +2 attack buff effect is just gravy on top. If the enemy general does not have an answer for the Flying / Rush minion, It can mean their utter end.
  508.  
  509. Emotional & Potential Impact
  510.  
  511. Summoning this minion is always exciting for the friendly general because It usually means their burst damage combo can finally be utilized. Enemy generals will be annoyed by how this card is used because it reminds them a lot of Lantern Fox. For Songhai players, It’s best to be wary of Wings of Paradise becoming a reduced mana cost, Lantern fox 4,5,6 with a dragon seal’ish keyword ability built in. Personally, I enjoy the card regardless of it’s burst potential because I’m able to utilize a new deck strategy revolved around an existing mechanic and the “hinderance?” of adding similar cards Is a great trade off.
  512. -----------
  513. White Widow
  514. Recommended Faction: Vanar and Vetruvian
  515.  
  516. Impact in the ladder: Card will see play.
  517.  
  518. Impact in the Gauntlet: Instant pick. A repeatable per turn effect that’s relevant the second she’s summoned, a lightning rod for removal and dispel effects, this minion is the threat before your even bigger threats.
  519.  
  520. Summary
  521.  
  522. The recent change to White Widow made it a very compelling card to add. Her attack and health are pretty great for her cost and you’re also able to get instant value if you decide to replace a card after you summon her. Her ability has the potential to get out of hand with the help of other friendly Aethermasters. I’d argue that she’s versatile and powerful enough to be included in decks that don’t include Aethermasters as a repeatable free 2 damage effect is nothing to scoff at. It all adds up in the long run.
  523.  
  524.  
  525. Minion Strategy
  526.  
  527. Try to summon White Widow in an area away from harm. The next step is to make use of her damage effect by replacing a card. If White Widow lives, the player can summon another White Widow and stack their effects. Try to get the most value out of White Widow as she is a huge target for dispel, transform or destroy based spells.
  528.  
  529. Deck Strategy
  530.  
  531. Besides the obvious Replace decks, White Widow can fit the 4 slot of most control or mid-range decks. Personally, I’m glad that we have another 4 drop that can contest well against the monopoly of Emeral Rejuvinator. In constructed, I can see White Widow being played in Vanar and Vetruvian decks. In The Gauntlet, White Widow is an instant pick for all the factions. The ability to deal free damage each turn is just too good to pass up.
  532.  
  533. Emotional & Potential Impact
  534.  
  535. It’s always fun to play White Widow as I’m able to get an immediate effect. This card can get out of hand quite quickly as the free damage does slowly add up. Whenever I go up against a White Widow, i quickly want to remove it because of how annoying it is. This minion will see play in both ladder and constructed. Who knows, games might even be won because her ability targeted the enemy general instead. As it stands, this card is fairly balanced and does not require any further changes.
  536. -----------
  537. Dreamgazer (Updated: 1/25/2016, Ruby Rifter and friends)
  538.  
  539. Recommended Faction: Aggro Abyssian, Songhai, Zoo Vanar
  540.  
  541. Impact in the ladder: Will see play but It will possibly help to break the meta (maybe)
  542.  
  543. Impact in the Gauntlet: Amazing early game tempo, relevant throughout the game, helps you develop a board much quicker and search for answers. It’s an Awesome pick.
  544.  
  545. Summary
  546. This minion is currently the only minion in the game that can be summoned from your action bar without using any mana. The 2 damage “drawback” is hardly anything worth worrying about as the player can still opt to get around it by paying a reasonable mana cost of 2. In the early game, this minion can dramatically improve your chances to secure a board while still keeping up tempo. This best part about Dreamgazer is the fact that It doesn’t need to have a deck built around replace in order for it to be effective. Aggro decks can opt to include Dreamgazer as a way to quickly overwhelm their opponent while simultaneously digging for answers or more threats.
  547.  
  548. Minion Strategy
  549.  
  550. Dreamgazer’s mana cost, attack and health are all balanced enough to be playable. However, the effect to summon it for “free” is what truly makes the card shine. Aggro decks will LOVE to include this card because It basically turns their decks into 36 card decks and enables them to draw into answers much quicker. The dream is to have Dreamgazer in your opening hand and replacing it in order to develop great tempo and keep consistent threats on board.
  551.  
  552. Dreamgazer will reach it’s full potential once the “general takes damage” set of minions arrive. Dreamgazer is going to be abused by consistently speeding up the summoning of Blood Taura and enabling a OTK or burst damage strategy with Ruby Rifter. At worst, the player plays the minion as a 2/2 for the cost of 2 life. But with Ruby Rifter added into the mix? This minion becomes a 2 card combo that enables you to deal 14+ damage in a single turn.
  553.  
  554.  
  555. Deck Strategy
  556.  
  557. Summon it for “free”, go for enemy general damage and win the game before the enemy general can stabilize or counter your aggressive strategy. Aggro Abyssian will have a place for Dreamgazer because of their urgent need to deal quick damage and fill the board. Aggro Abyssian is generally seen running Void Pulse and the healing can help reduce the drawback of losing health. Songhai decks will opt to include this minion solely because of its alternative mana cost and 2 attack. Dreamgazer’s 2 attack enables Songhai to have a target for divine focus and It’s 0 mana cost allows the Songhai player to use all their mana on buffing spells. In the late game, Songhai players will be able to deal a considerable amount of burst if all the right combo pieces are in place.
  558.  
  559. Emotional & Potential Impact
  560.  
  561. Dreamgazer is one of those cards that you LOVE having in your opening hand as it builds “free” tempo. Dreamgazer is one of those cards that you’d probably hate your opponent for having in their opening hand as it creates another annoying threat for you to deal with.This minion is really powerful during the early game and versatile enough to be of use throughout the entire game. Regardless of it’s early game power level, this minion will not help you stabilize or turn games around unless you opt to go the burst route. Whether you use Dreamgazer to out race your opponent in damage, provide burst or make efficient trades, expect this card to see in future decks against you. This minion requires no buffs or nerfs as It’s in a good state right now.
  562. -----------
  563.  
  564. Astral Crusader
  565.  
  566. Recommended Faction: Unknown in it’s current state.
  567.  
  568. Impact in the ladder: I don’t see this card breaking the meta or being used that often.
  569.  
  570. Impact in the Gauntlet: Would be a solid late game or mid game pick.
  571.  
  572. Summary
  573.  
  574. Astral Crusader is a late game or mid game minion with relevant attack and defense suited for It’s starting cost of 7. It has a stacking effect that reduces its mana cost by one and buffs its stats by +1/+1 whenever the player replaces it. Unlike other high costed minions, players will rejoice having this minion in their opening hand as they’re able to make use of its effect much faster. Besides being a big body minion with an increasingly lower mana cost, there just Isn’t anything else that this card has going for it.
  575.  
  576.  
  577. Deck Strategy
  578.  
  579. Step 1: Don’t get greedy.
  580.  
  581. Step 2: Have Astral Crusader in your opening hand and replace it for another card. Astral cusader is now a 6 mana minion with 8 attack and 7 health.
  582.  
  583. Step 3: Hope you draw into the same Astral Crusader again and either summon it or return it. If returned, Astral Crusader is now a 5 mana 9 attack and 8 health minion and be sure to also FOLLOW Step 4.
  584.  
  585. Step 4: Repeat Step 1, hope you draw into Astral Crusader and summon the 5 mana Astral Crusader.
  586.  
  587. The player will have to decide when to unleash their improved Astral Crusader to the battlefield and by doing so, pressure the enemy to have an answer for it. With that said, I feel like Astral Crusader is missing something before It’s seriously considered in most lists. Have you guys thought about giving Astral Crusader a keyword ability such as flying in order to increase its playability? How about including a relevant Opening Gambit that makes it so the minion has instant value?
  588.  
  589. Astral Crusader
  590. 7 mana, 7/6
  591. Flying
  592. Whenever you replace this card, it costs 1 less and gets +1/+1.
  593.  
  594. Astral Crusader
  595. 7 mana, 7/6
  596. Opening Gambit: Deal damage to an enemy minion equal to twice the amount of times this card was replaced.
  597. Whenever you replace this card, it costs 1 less and gets +1/+1.
  598.  
  599. Deck Strategy
  600.  
  601. I’ve been having trouble trying to make this card work. Besides the obvious of including it in a Aethermaster Replace deck, It’s currently just a low costed beat stick with no real home. I did consider Magmar and Flash Reincarnation but Astral Crusader is already competitve with Archon Spellbinder and I usually wanted to use Archon Spellbinder instead. As much as I don’t want to give in to the “only viable in Gauntlet” feedback, you can’t shake the fact that this minion will literally be an all star to any Gauntlet deck.
  602.  
  603. Emotional & Potential Impact
  604. This card looks PHENOMENAL. It’s got an S-Rank when it comes to looking good and seeing Its attack animation always puts a smile on my face. In its current form, I don’t think this card will shake the meta or make that much of an impact. However, The Gauntlet is an entirely different story. Astral Crusader’s base stats and ability escalates it to an almost instant pick rate for just about any faction. The minion will surely see enormous amount of play there and will be a top choice for any late game (or earlier) option.
  605. -----
  606. War Talon
  607.  
  608. Recommended Faction: none :(
  609.  
  610. Impact in the ladder: I don’t really see any constructed decks using War Talon.
  611.  
  612. Impact in the Gauntlet: This minion is a decent pick for decks that want a big body with provoke.
  613.  
  614. Summary
  615.  
  616. War Talon is a 7 cost minion with 4 attack; 9 defense; Frenzy and Provoke. Provoke has always been one of my favorite keyword abilities in the game. Restricting your opponent’s movement, options and plays around one target is what makes it so enjoyable. Normally, your opponent would have some sort of dispel, transform or destroy effect that can bypass your provoke minion. However, that’s not always the case and your opponent would resort to summoning minions all around the provoke minion in hopes of having more damage to take it down next turn.
  617.  
  618. The fusion of Frenzy and Provoke turned out to be extremely interesting. The tactic of mass summoning monsters around provoke minions becomes redundant if they can just hit everything and only receives enemy general damage. Still, I don’t exactly see myself adding this card to any of my constructed decks. War Talon just costs too much and has to compete with better Provoke minions such as Aymara Healer, IronCliffe Guardian and Bonereaper.
  619.  
  620. Minion Strategy
  621.  
  622. When it comes to Keyword minions, just let them do what they do best. War Talon is meant to be a annoying bully that restricts enemy options and punish nearby minions around if not answered. Let War Talon get all the attention, make full use of his 9 defense and attack everything around him. War Talon might be linear but he will always excel at what it does.
  623.  
  624.  
  625. Deck Strategy
  626.  
  627. Another high defense minion? Another Divine Bond combo. Lyonar loves to set up burst damage with Divine Bond and high defense minions. Why delay the game even further when your minion can hit for 10+ damage? However, there is a problem. Lyonar already uses a number of above the curve Provoke minions. Most Lyonar decks would rather opt to include another minion that serve a different role. War Talon's chances of being included in Lyonar decks are low because he doesn't exactly offer more than the other Lyonar Provoke minions.
  628.  
  629. Besides the eternally obvious Divine Bond combo, Magmar can make use of War Talon's high defense by Flashing it into play with almost no downside. With the help of Flash,
  630. War Talon becomes an extremely impactful and relevant threat with 5 mana, 4 attack and 7 defense. Even with the help of Flash, War Talon will have some trouble being included in Magmar decks because of their tendencies to use a lot of high cost minions It’s tough to justify a deck slot position when Magmar is often seen using Makantor Warbeast, Silithar Elder and Archon Spellbinder.
  631.  
  632.  
  633. Emotional & Potential Impact
  634.  
  635. War Talon symbolizes the Frenzy + Provoke idea that Duelyst fans would usually debate over it being possibly good or not. It certainly does feel powerful when you drop it down (and if it works) but it feels even better when you attack everything around it. As it currently stands, the minion is perfect the way it is. Even If War Talon won’t see any play in constructed, I’ll still be happy to use War Talon in my Gauntlet runs.
  636.  
  637. -----
  638. Tethermancer
  639.  
  640. Recommended Faction: none
  641.  
  642. Impact on the ladder: Will see little to no play in Its current state.
  643.  
  644. Impact in the Gauntlet: Decent enough pick but most of the time, I’d rather want a Primus Shieldmaster instead.
  645.  
  646. Summary
  647.  
  648. Tethermancer is a 4 mana Provoke minion with 1 attack, 6 defense and the ability to dispel enemy minions that attack it. Tethermancer reminds me a lot of Sunstone Templar, except the dispel effect can also work on ranged minions that attack it. It’s worth noting that Tethermancer has stats that are similar to Primus Shield. Sadly, If given the choice between Tethermancer or Primus Shield, I will always have to go with Primus Shield because I don’t think Tether’s ability is strong enough to justify its low attack. In order for Tethermancer to be viable in both constructed and The Gauntlet, changes need to be made.
  649.  
  650. Minion Strategy
  651.  
  652. At first glance, Tethermancer can be pegged as a regular Provoke minion with an added twist. Provoke minions are no strangers to taking damage but Tethermancer aims to also “weaken” enemy minions that attack it by dispeling their abilities. At 1 attack, Tethermancer doesn’t prove to be that much of a formidable threat against any enemy minion or general. Her 6 defense is great but It means nothing if her attack isn’t somewhat on par in order to compliment it better. Tethermancer currently runs a minion strategy that makes friendly generals frown and enemy generals smile.
  653.  
  654. Deck Strategy
  655.  
  656. Tethermancer has yet to reach her true potential. In her current state, I don’t see any strategy that can be used in order for her to secure a deck spot. Whether it’s The Gauntlet or Constructed, the 6 Duelyst factions currently have no interest with Tethermancer because of her inability to pull her weight. Until changes are made to her ability or certain stats get buffed, Tethermancer will forever be a card that is either disenchanted or found rotting in collections.
  657.  
  658. Emotional & Potential Impact
  659.  
  660. Tethermancer’s art reminds me a lot of Rose from the Street Fighter and that’s a huge plus in my book. As a minion, she’s pleasant to look at but she doesn’t offer anything else that’s worthwhile. In order for Tethermancer to become playable, she might need a total revamp. She should stay at 4 mana but her attack and ability are the two factors that are currently holding her back. At the risk of overshadowing Primus Shieldmaster by indirectly promoting power creep, changes to her defense need to be made. I propose this change:
  661.  
  662. Tethermancer
  663. 4 cost
  664. R
  665. 2* / 5
  666. Provoke
  667. Dispel all nearby enemy minions around it
  668.  
  669. This new Tethermancer acts as a “Dispel Ward. Tethermancer’s new ability is great because she acts as a recurring dispel source that punishes nearby and newly summoned enemy minions around her. Enemy generals without any answers to Tethermancer will have to summon their minions with no abilities in order to regain their movement and targeting options. Her mana cost stayed the same because she now has a suitable ability that justifies her cost. She might of lost 1 defense but It was a much needed trade in order to gain 1 more attack and be able to deal some meaningful damage. I believe this new version of Tethermancer will see a lot of play and will be a top contender for that coveted 4 drop spot.
  670.  
  671. (Note: If 2 attack is too strong, I still believe the card will do alright at 1 attack because of her ability),
  672.  
  673.  
  674. -----
  675. Bone Reaper
  676.  
  677. Recommended Faction: Lyonar, Vanar / varies
  678.  
  679. Impact in the ladder: Will see play
  680.  
  681. Impact in the Gauntlet: Phenomenal pick. A great swing card that effectively stabilizes the board.
  682.  
  683. Summary
  684.  
  685. Bonereaper is a 6 mana Provoke minion with 2 attack, 9 defense and the ability to always deal 2 damage to each nearby enemy minion at the end of the owner’s turn. Man, talk about a beast! For 6 mana, you get a same turn / consistent effect provoke minion with extremely high defense. This minion is definitely worth its cost and I’d argue that it’s somewhat undercosted for what it offers.
  686.  
  687. Minion Strategy
  688.  
  689. Summon it early or on curve and punish nearby enemy minions that are already low on health. Think of Bonereaper’s effect as a pseudo Frenzy ability but without the risk of being counterattacked. In fact, I can even argue that Bonereaper is just a neutral lesser version of Makantor Warbeast because of its similar cost and its ability to punish nearby enemy minions the turn it’s summoned. Regardless of how potent its ability is, the enemy general will still need to get around Bonereaper’s high defense. Without proper dispel, transform or destroy based effects, Bonereaper can run amok by minusing 2 health off every new minion that the enemy general might summon around it. It’s safe to say that Bonereaper is the new standard of what it means to truly be a provoke minion.
  690.  
  691.  
  692. Deck Strategy
  693.  
  694. Let Lyonar punch things really hard with their 11 / 9 Divine Bonded minion. Songhai is too displeased with Bone’s mana cost and will continue to stick to low curve minions and buff / damaging spells. Vanar will adopt Bonereaper and heavily make use of its high defense and aoe ability. Heck, some Vanars might even opt to combine Bonereaper and Polarity just for the sake of dealing burst damage.
  695.  
  696. Magmar is already known to use a lot of high cost neutral and faction specific minions. Bonereaper’s attack makes it a target for Plasma Storm. Because of these reasons and more, Bonereaper is unable to recieve a spot within the Magmar faction. A reality where Abyssian utilizes a strategy where they outrace their opponent in damage is also a reality where they wouldn’t need the help of Bonereaper. But in a reality where the Abyssian faction hangs up its burst damage for some tempo / control strategies, then yes; Bonereaper will serve them extremely well by providing some much needed aoe.
  697.  
  698. Finally, in a new era where 3rd Wish is changed to only target one specific type of minion, Vetruvian will scramble to see what works and what doesn’t work. Bonereaper can be seen in Vetruivan decks but it will always need to fight with Aymara Healer in order to secure a deck spot. In most cases, Vetruvian might seek out the extra healing and damage from Aymara Healer and disregard Bonereaper entirely. Personally, I can’t see myself using Bonereaper in Vetruvian decks because of Aymara’s existence.
  699.  
  700. Emotional & Potential Impact
  701. Bonereaper is one of the best Provoke minions in the game. Summoning this puppy on curve or earlier enables the player to feel extremely well. By summoning it, the player acquires a feeling of accomplishment with how the overall game is going for them. Before the changes, Bonereaper was extremely strong and would be considered auto include for most factions. This new Bonereaper traded ability damage and one less attack for more defense. Not only is 2 damage AOE fair but at 2 attack, Bonereaper is now a target for Zen’Rui. Whether Bonereaper is used to address swarm decks or be used to punish enemy generals that don’t play around it, Bonereaper will definitely be a devastating minion to watch out for in DUELYST.
  702.  
  703. -----
  704. Hollow Grovekeeper
  705.  
  706. Recommended Faction: I can see all but Songhai using this.
  707.  
  708. Impact on the ladder: Card will see A LOT of play. Players will look to this card in order to counter the new surge of Provoke cards introduced.
  709.  
  710. Impact in the Gauntlet: I see this card as a strong pick. Include this card to your deck and use it when the time is right. Frenzy and Provoke is always going to be a relevant occurrence and why not save your minions from trading damage?
  711.  
  712. Summary
  713.  
  714. Hollow Grovekeeper is a 5 mana Provoke minion with 3 attack, 4 defense and the ability to destroy nearby Frenzy or Provoke minions while simultaneously gaining Frenzy and Provoke by doing so. A reactive tech card that is optimally used in metas that revolve around Provoke and by counterpicking factions such as Lyonar and Magmar. This minion keeps himself, Frenzy and all of his old and new Provoke buddies in check. Hollow Grovekeeepr is a necessary card for the game and in tournament settings, can be quite the card to utilize when sideboarding.
  715.  
  716. Minion Strategy
  717.  
  718. Does the enemy general have a Provoke or Frenzy minion that’s ruining your fun? Punish them by summoning Hollow Grovekeeper and turn the tables on them. When the time is right, Hollow Grovekeeper can ensure you some serious tempo as he can destroy a lot of notable threats. At best, you destroy a Ironclifee Guardian, Aymara Healer, Bonereaper or even an enemy Hollow Grovekeeper. At worst, you destroy a Silverguard Knight or a minion buffed by Cosmic Flesh.
  719.  
  720.  
  721. The recent change to Hollow Grovekeeper made it so he can target friendly Provoke or Frenzy minions as well. This new update enables the player to actively create a build around me strategy in order to fully maximize their Hollow Grovekeeper value. On the ladder, you can’t really expect to run into Provoke or Rush minions as often as you’d like. But in a tournament setting, you can prepare accordingly and counterplay their Provoke or Frenzy minions because of matchup and deck knowledge.
  722.  
  723. Deck Strategy
  724.  
  725. Don’t let Hollow Grovekeeper be a dead card! Use your friendly Provoke or Frenzy minions as enablers in case your opponent doesn’t run any minions to enable his effect. Currently, there really aren’t that many strategies available for Hollow Grovekeeper to utilize. It main use lies in its ability that propels it to make an instant impact on the board. Until Counterplay Games decides to make a spell that gives ANY minion Provoke or Frenzy, Hollow Grovekeeper stays as a tech card or a sideboard minion that targets certain metas or factions.
  726.  
  727. Emotional & Potential Impact
  728.  
  729. When this card was first announced, I instantly saw a winner. The art really captivated me because of its resemblance to Blanka from Street Fighter. But looking further, It was clearly inspired by the Japanese Oni and the lighting attack animation and crazy hair were just coincidences. But the art was just the beginning, this minion still has a lot more going for it.
  730.  
  731. I remember the type of conversation topics that the Clubhouse had when Hollow Grovekeepr was first announced. “Will future games involve players destroy their enemy Hollow’s with their Hollow’s and vice versa until either player runs out of a Hollow?”. Another topic involved the Lyonar faction and how Hollow Grovekeeper can potentially ruin their tournament presence. Between these two topics, one of them is potentially true and the other is just a doomsaying statement.
  732.  
  733. When the new Provoke cards are released, the community will utilize and test the new Provoke minions in their ladder decks. You can expect players to bank on using Hollow Grovekeeper during a surge in Provoke deck strategies. Ultimately, players will counter their enemy Hollows with their own and vice versa. Though, I wonder if it will be a consistent strategy that is still used after the next series of minions are released.
  734.  
  735. However, I think that in a tournament setting, Hollow Grovekeeper will stay as a solid sideboard card. So far, the only Frenzy minions that are consistent enough to see play are Hollow Grovekeepers or Makantor Warbeasts. Magmar’s presence in tournaments are as abysmal as Abyssian and instead, players will almost always sideboard Hollows for the Lyonar matchup. Some people still see Hollow as a Lyonar hate card but don’t they realize that Lyonar players can side their own Hollow to counter their opponent’s Hollow? Mind games are going to be rampant once this card is released and overall, I’m very happy with the design of this card. Once Hollow Grovekeeper is released, I hope to see some awesome Frenzy punishes.
  736. -----
  737.  
  738.  
  739.  
  740.  
  741.  
  742.  
  743.  
  744.  
  745.  
  746.  
  747.  
  748.  
  749.  
  750.  
  751.  
  752.  
  753.  
  754.  
  755.  
  756.  
  757.  
  758.  
  759.  
  760.  
  761.  
  762.  
  763. PMacK
  764. Decklists
  765.  
  766.  
  767. Feedback:
  768.  
  769. I’ve decided it would be easier to keep my feedback organized in a spreadsheet. You can see all my latest thoughts in a Google Doc at the following link:
  770.  
  771. https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1F71wg1ofdyzI5XXrJ1TFGnnbpiJz49frWdBiE6bK3tc/edit?usp=sharing
  772.  
  773. --------------------------------------
  774. February 28 Feedback
  775.  
  776. - Added my thoughts on the forcefield cards to the spreadsheet
  777.  
  778. --------------------------------------
  779. February 17 Feedback
  780.  
  781. - Added some thoughts to my spreadsheet about Vetruvian in general
  782.  
  783. --------------------------------------
  784. February 8 Feedback
  785.  
  786. Nightsorrow Assassin: This is definitely a top tier 3-drop now, and will likely be a 3-of in all Abyssian decks just like Fenrir Warmaster is for Vanar, and so as long as that is acceptable then this is a good thing. It doesn’t feel overpowered, because it dies so easily with 1 health. I like this change for a couple reasons: Nightsorrow used to lead to a ton of burst damage, which was problematic, and this also buffs Abyssian, which is needed.
  787.  
  788. Scion’s Third Wish: I really like this change. Third Wish definitely needed to be nerfed, and this is a great way to do it so that it can still be powerful, but isn’t an auto-include in Vetruvian decks. Now you have to build a deck around it. I also like how this pushes people to play obelisks more. My only note for something to change is that I would also add the Dunecaster ability that makes the Dervish not go away at end of turn. I think players would be annoyed when they have to Third Wish and lose it end of turn. That change would also further encourage players to use obelisks, which currently aren’t played much. One thing to note is that future Dervishes that are designed will increase the power of Third Wish (which is fine as long as it’s kept in check).
  789.  
  790. Razorback: I like this change, feels much more reasonable.
  791.  
  792. Kaido Assassin: Love this change, it was exactly as I had suggested earlier. I hope this change sticks. After playing with it some it feels like the Songhai deck works better now, it really ties the deck together.
  793.  
  794. Mask of Shadows: I like that this isn’t being nerfed so hard. I still really like my idea for how to change this card, which is written in the section below.
  795.  
  796. Twilight Sorcerer: I like it at 5 mana better than 4. Might not be played much now though (possibly, requires testing). Testing might prove that it could use a small stat boost too since it’s at 5 mana.
  797.  
  798. Keeper of the Vale: I like this change a lot. Makes it different from Reaper, but really tones down the power and makes it not feel so bad when the opponent gets a big minion out of it. I think this is the best version of this card we’ve seen yet.
  799.  
  800. Jaxi: As I had mentioned earlier, I think it’s a good idea for Mini-Jax to only spawn on your own side of the board. Reduces feel-bad RNG, and isn’t overpowered now that Jaxi is smaller.
  801.  
  802. --------------------------------------
  803. February 5 Feedback
  804.  
  805. I think for Mask of Shadows, another ability should be added to make the card better, more interesting, and more consistent. I’ve come up with a design that I think could work really well: add a second ability that says “Minions nearby your General gain Backstab(1)”.
  806.  
  807. Obviously this would make the card stronger, so you would have to test it and might have to tweak some numbers (such as making the mask cost 3, and/or only giving the general Backstab(3))
  808.  
  809. So it could look something like this:
  810.  
  811. Mask of Shadows
  812. Mana Cost: 3
  813. Ability: Your General gains Backstab(3). Minions nearby your General gain Backstab(1).
  814.  
  815. There’s a bunch of reasons I think this would be a good change:
  816.  
  817. ● This makes Mask of Shadows stronger (because it is currently quite weak), but doesn’t add to its ability to do huge bursts of damage to a single target. Both abilities can’t lead to the same unit or general being backstabbed in the same turn.
  818. ● This stays on-theme and makes the card entirely focused on backstab.
  819. ● The “flavor” of the card stays consistent (the mask is providing shadow for the general and minions nearby)
  820. ● It gives the card some utility in scenarios where the Songhai general can’t get behind things. Currently what is making MoS so weak is that it is a dead draw in a lot of scenarios.
  821. ● This powers up the card but still doesn’t make it combo in bad ways with Cyclone Mask.
  822. ● This gives Songhai some removal, something that it currently is quite lacking after Mask’s nerf.
  823. ● This once again makes the mask feel like a cool, desirable legendary card that players will aspire to get.
  824.  
  825. Ever since Mask of Shadows was nerfed, it has felt like Songhai games have lost some of their flavor. There is no longer a game of positioning that created an interesting tension. I think this change could bring that back in a healthy way that doesn’t lead to giant bursts of damage on one single target.
  826.  
  827. -----------------------------------
  828. February 5 Feedback
  829.  
  830. I was going over the cards in the game, and there are currently a few cards that seem like they are simply too weak, and because of that, are mainly just forgotten/lost/rarely played. I had some ideas to slight tweaks to some of these cards that could make them more interesting and increase their chances that they could see play, and still be balanced.
  831.  
  832. Rook: This card feels very small and weak for its cost. I think its size could be increased to something like a 7/7.
  833. Serpenti: I’ve never seen this card played by anyone, even in the gauntlet. Perhaps it’s health could be increased to 5?
  834. Purgatos the Realmkeeper: This card is pretty weak, especially as an epic and when compared to something like Emerald Rejuvenator (which costs the same but has 1 more attack and gets its healing bonus right away). I would change Purgatos’s ability to: “Whenever this deals damage, deal 3 damage to the enemy general. Whenever this minion is dealt damage, restore 3 health to your general.”
  835. Captain Hank Heart: This is a pretty cool minion, that’s just too weak for its cost. I think this could be a much cooler card if it both a) had +1 health, and b) also healed your general when it dealt damage.
  836. Prophet of the White Palm: It’s a cool effect, but on such a small body it doesn’t ever seem worth a card. Could his stats be increased, to a 2/1 at least?
  837. Songweaver: At two health it feels too fragile for a 3 mana minion. Maybe switch it to a 2/3?
  838. Aegis Barrier: Especially for a legendary card, this doesn’t do much. I would also give the minion +1/+1.
  839. Storm Kage: This is a very cool concept for a legendary minion, but ends up being too weak. Could the spell this gives be buffed? Or perhaps make the Kage smaller and cost less?
  840. Dark Transformation: Abyssian is weak right now, and I think if we made this spell cost 4 instead of 5 it could help that out and still be balanced.
  841.  
  842. And lastly, like we had talked about before, I really think Kaido Assassin should be buffed. It feels like it should be one of the staple cards of Songhai, and it was one of the first cards that jumped out at me as a brand new player. Currently however it’s just way too weak, and never sees play in any reasonable deck.
  843.  
  844. --------------------------------------
  845. February 4 Feedback
  846.  
  847. I like the changes to Keeper and Jaxi overall, and I agree that they needed to be nerfed. I have a couple thoughts on the implementation of the changes:
  848.  
  849. Jaxi: From a “flavor” perspective Jaxi is now the same size as Mini-Jax. Maybe Jaxi should be a 1/2 so it’s bigger than the mini version?
  850.  
  851. Also, I think it would be a good thing to only allow Mini-Jax to spawn on corners on your own side of the board. Now that the card is weaker, this would be an acceptable improvement (so your mini jax is less likely to just get killed immediately), and overall the card would still be weaker than it was as a 2/2. A reason this change would be good is that players would have less annoying RNG moments where Mini Jax spawned on the wrong side of the board.
  852.  
  853. Keeper: Keeper’s ability as Dying Wish is less oppressive, which I like. With that change in mind I think that making it a 4/4 isn’t needed as the card has already been nerfed enough. I would leave it as a 4/5.
  854.  
  855. I was talking with Pabzi in the chat and he made a good point that it could be good to make Keeper a 4-cost minion, to add more variety to the 4-cost slot in decks and have it contend with Emerald Rejuvenator and Twilight for deck slots. I like that idea, and I think this could be a good implementation:
  856.  
  857. Keeper of the Vale
  858. Mana Cost: 4
  859. Attack: 4
  860. Health: 4
  861. Dying Wish: Nearby this minion, summon a random friendly minion with mana cost 3 or less that was destroyed this game.
  862.  
  863. --------------------------------------
  864. February 2 Feedback
  865.  
  866. After playing a bunch more on the ladder, I’m doubling down on the fact that I think Scion’s Third Wish should be nerfed - its power level is problematic.
  867.  
  868. I have a simple solution that keeps the card essentially intact, but makes it more reasonable - remove the health boost, so it gives +3 attack and blast, but no health.
  869.  
  870. Scion’s Third Wish:
  871.  
  872. Scion’s Third Wish
  873. Cost: 3
  874. Give a friendly minion +3 attack and blast.
  875.  
  876. --------------------------------------
  877. January 29 Feedback
  878.  
  879. Kaido Assassin: Making this card playable would probably be the most important thing to make a zoo-style Songhai aggro viable, but I feel like this card needs an extra point of health to make it a viable card to play. Currently it's basically unplayable in a competitive deck, and most of the time it’s no better than a Skyrock Golem. It needs to not simply die to one general attack.
  880.  
  881. I would change the card to the following:
  882.  
  883. Mana Cost: 2
  884. Attack: 2
  885. Health: 3
  886. Ability: Backstab(2)
  887.  
  888. This would make it in line with Windblade Adept and Crystal Cloaker as 4/3s for 2 mana when they’re in the right situation.
  889.  
  890. Other options could be:
  891.  
  892. Mana Cost: 2
  893. Attack: 2
  894. Health: 3
  895. Ability: Backstab(1)
  896.  
  897. or
  898.  
  899. Mana Cost: 2
  900. Attack: 1
  901. Health: 3
  902. Ability: Backstab(2)
  903.  
  904. or
  905.  
  906. Mana Cost: 2
  907. Attack: 1
  908. Health: 3
  909. Ability: Backstab(3)
  910.  
  911. --------------------------------------
  912. January 28 Feedback
  913.  
  914. Scion’s Third Wish: I think this is currently the most problematic card in Duelyst, and much too strong. No other card makes a player feel as immediately helpless and frustrated when an opponent plays it, and I would definitely rank it as my least favorite card in the game to encounter. All it takes is a generic 2/2 on the first turn, then 3rd wish, and the opponent already feel like a big underdog in the game. It gains so much value in free minion kills and general damage, and is not easy to deal with since it makes the minions so large.
  915.  
  916. Ranged and blast are very powerful abilities, but are somewhat balanced by the fact that they usually are on small, easy to destroy minions, and also by the fact that they need a turn before they can attack. With third wish though, the minion also gains a lot of health, so you essentially need an immediate destruction spell or a silence, or you’re going to lose, and no matter what you have lost value.
  917.  
  918. Another problem with Third Wish is that it has entirely warped the Vetruvian faction around that one card. Vetruvian now feels like the “Third Wish” faction, rather than having its own unique identity. 95% of Vetruvian decks I encounter are basically Third Wish decks, with ways to draw into Third Wish, ways to rebuy more copies of Third Wish (Twilight Sorcerer, Loremaster), and the optimal minions to play Third Wish on. Third Wish has even edged out other Vetruvian blast cards such and Pyromancer and Scarab.
  919.  
  920. The concept of Third Wish is neat, but I think it just needs to be implemented in a much more fair way. It needs to be one of multiple possible ways to build a Vetruvian deck, rather than the defining card of the entire faction.
  921.  
  922. Here are some possible fixes for Third Wish that I can think of. You could apply one or more of the following:
  923.  
  924. ● Remove the health increase so that the minion can be dealt with easier
  925. ● Reduce the attack increase to +2 rather than +3
  926. ● Make it so the effect only lasts until the end of the turn (you still get to blast one or more things, so it wouldn’t be a waste of a card).
  927.  
  928. Another possible implementation could be to not give any attack/health increase, but instead just give all of your minions blast until the end of the current turn.
  929.  
  930. I see that there is an elegance with the three different wishes and their numbers (first wish has all 1s, second wish has all 2s, etc.). If this is a problem with how you change Third Wish, one thing you could do is also change Second Wish and rename them. For example Second Wish could become Third Wish and draw 3 for 3 mana, and then Third Wish becomes Second Wish and gives +2 attack and blast.
  931.  
  932. Lastly, if it is a problem that the Vetruvian faction in general would be too weak with a Third Wish nerf, I don’t think that’s a good reason to not change Third Wish itself. That would just mean that other Vetruvian cards might need to be buffed a bit.
  933.  
  934. Keeper of the Vale: Obviously you guys are aware that many players aren’t happy with this card. I don’t think the situation is quite as bad as people make it seem, but I do think this card is too strong and too swingy in its current form.
  935.  
  936. If I were to change Keeper, I would make it like the following:
  937.  
  938. Keeper of the Vale
  939. Mana Cost: 5
  940. Attack: 4
  941. Health: 4
  942. Opening Gambit: Nearby this minion, summon a random friendly minion with mana cost 3 or less that was destroyed this game.
  943.  
  944. This would just make it so you don’t quite get so much value off of Keeper. Also, because the summoned minion is limited to a 3-cost, the randomness is decreased and you wouldn’t get giant swings where a player gets an unfair free minion back such as an Ironcliffe Guardian.
  945.  
  946. This would also encourage players to play more 3-cost minions. Right now the game is set up to heavily reward 2-cost minions because of the mana tiles, but from a deck-building perspective this would be interesting and reward more 3s.
  947.  
  948. Mask of Shadows: I definitely agree that Mask of Shadows needed to be nerfed, as the amount of damage it could do was too high. The chosen change to this card however makes it significantly weaker, to the point where it’s probably not worth playing in a competitive deck. That could be fine though, depending on what your goal is for this card.
  949.  
  950. In the abstract it’s a cool card, but it doesn’t feel like it’s “legendary” anymore. Each faction has their very powerful legendary cards that fans of that faction aspire to get, whereas this card now just feels like a neat backstab-themed card. It certainly wouldn’t be worth it to me to craft Mask of Shadows at this power level as a legendary. If this change went live, I would disenchant my three copies of the card.
  951.  
  952. So if the goal for Mask of Shadows is to be one of Songhai’s strong and really cool legendary cards, I think the card needs to be nerfed less. If that were the case I would go with +2 attack and backstab(2). It brings down the damage, but still makes the card powerful and useful, and exciting enough to be a legendary card.
  953.  
  954. On the other hand, if you really like the clean implementation of no attack bonus and backstab(4), I think this card should be moved to the epic rarity. It makes it a cool backstab card, but would be more reasonable for fans of backstab to craft. Given this nerf, I think Cyclone Mask is a better candidate for the legendary spot than Mask would be.
  955.  
  956. For clarifying my thoughts on the power level, losing the +2 attack hurts this card a lot. As someone who has primarily played Songhai, I used the +2 attack part of the card way more than the backstab (the most common use cases for the card was to just kill a 4/4 minion or go aggro on the opposing general from their front). It is not easy getting in position to backstab, unless the Songhai player also plays other subpar cards like Silhouette Tracer. Without a consistent attack increase, this card doesn’t do anything the majority of the time - it feels more like an inconsistent removal spell.
  957.  
  958. The strongest part of the backstab ability is the actual backstab itself (getting to hit something without being hit back), not the extra damage done because of backstab. Because of this, a card that gave +2 attack and had backstab(0) would still be stronger than the card just having backstab(4) and no extra attack power.
  959.  
  960. If the concern over giving Mask of Shadows +2 attack is the gameplay that occurs when it is comboed with Cyclone Mask, I believe that is more the fault of the non-interactive gameplay that occurs because of Cyclone Mask rather than Mask of Shadows. I have more thoughts on Cyclone Mask below.
  961.  
  962. Cyclone Mask & Spiral Technique: After nerfing Mask of Shadows, if I had to pick the two Songhai cards that were the most problematic from a gameplay perspective, I’d choose Cyclone Mask and Spiral Technique. Both lead to a lot of direct damage to generals, and are hard to interact with. After giant burst OTKs, I’d rank non-interactive direct damage as the next-worst thing that players don’t enjoy playing against.
  963.  
  964. The problem with Cyclone Mask is that the ranged ability is attached to a general rather than a minion. Ranged is a very strong ability, but is normally attached to a small and easily destroyed minion. This isn’t the case with ranged on a general. The existence of this artifact will also make any future cards that increase a Songhai general’s attack problematic. I think part of the problem with Mask of Shadows was that it could combo with Cyclone Mask.
  965.  
  966. If I were to come up with a solution to Cyclone Mask, I would either change the card entirely, or make it so that the general can only attack other minions at a range and not the opposing general.
  967.  
  968. For Spiral Technique, I think the card simply does too much damage for just one card. For me, Spiral Technique definitely holds the record for the most number of times a card wins a game in an unfun and anti-climactic way. It will be a close, interactive game, and then, “oh, that person is just dead to Spiral Technique”.
  969.  
  970. If I were to make a change to Spiral Technique, I’d just reduce the damage and cost slightly. Maybe 6 damage for 6 mana? It would require testing, but 8 damage is just a bit too much.
  971.  
  972. Jaxi: I’m of the opinion that sometimes small micro-changes to cards can be a good thing, especially while a game is in the beta like Duelyst is. Some cards aren’t too overwhelming and don’t need to be completely revamped, but for the health of a game a small tweak to the card would make things more balanced overall.
  973.  
  974. Take Jaxi for example - it is very ubiquitous and included in a lot of decks. In the abstract it’s probably the most powerful 2-drop, especially for neutral minions. I would want to reduce Jaxi’s power slightly, to make it less of an auto-include.
  975.  
  976. In this case, I would reduce Jaxi’s health to 1, making it a 2/1. This would essentially leave the card intact, but take a small bit of its power away from it. It would do the same thing it always did, but now would trade with 1/1s, and would die to Bloodtear Alchemist, etc. It would make it so Jaxi would still see play, but players might consider other cards instead.
  977.  
  978. I can think of other cards I would also make micro-changes to like this, but Jaxi is the most prominent and important one.
  979.  
  980. Hollow Grovekeeper: I have mixed feelings about this card. I like the concept, but I think the implementation needs to change slightly.
  981.  
  982. - I do really like that there will be another answer to large provoke minions, especially with how prevalent Lyonar is on the ladder.
  983.  
  984. - I don't really like how inconsistent and swingy this card is. Sometimes it'll just be generic minion, other times it will have provoke + frenzy and kill a large minion. I'm more alright with inconsistent niche cards in a game like Magic: The Gathering, because they play 2-out-of-3 matches and have a sideboard system. In a predominantly single-game format like Duelyst uses though, I would rather cards not feel as bad when they are drawn in matchups where they might not be needed.
  985.  
  986. - If I were to make a change to this card, I would make it an either-or thing, i.e. you either get to destroy a minion, or gain the abilities. I would change the ability to: "Opening Gambit: You may destroy a nearby minion with Provoke or Frenzy. If you don't, Hollow Grovekeeper gains Provoke and Frenzy." I think this could possibly be implemented easily with the “skip” interface.
  987.  
  988. This way if you don't feel bad playing it when it can't destroy a minion, and it also gives the player an interesting decision when there is a minion to destroy.
  989.  
  990. Bone Reaper: I'm not really a fan of this card for a couple reasons.
  991.  
  992. - It's really similar to Deathblighter, but strictly better. Deathblighter was a card that I was excited about as a new player and played for a while, but eventually abandoned because it wasn't quite good enough (the stats were too small). Rather than make a whole new card, it would feel better just to improve Deathblighter slightly by making it bigger.
  993.  
  994. - This card feels a bit too punishing to swarm or aggro decks. It's likely going to take out a couple minions at least the turn it is played, then force the opponent to spend a couple more cards to get rid of it, which they will need to do as soon as possible. There is already a decent amount of AOE in the game, and now every class will have access to a card that AOEs every turn. It would feel better if this was a faction-specific card, so at least only one faction had this powerful anti-aggro tool available.
  995.  
  996. Tethermancer: I like the idea, but it seems too weak/expensive for its stats. Rock Pulverizer is a 1/4 Provoke for just 2, and this doesn't guarantee it'll dispel anything like Lightbender does.
  997.  
  998. Aethermaster: I know this isn’t a new card, and the concept for it is cool, but the size has always seemed a little weak to me. This would be the key card for any dedicated “replace” deck, could it possibly be a good idea to make it a 2 / 3?
  999.  
  1000. Zoochz
  1001.  
  1002.  
  1003.  
  1004. Decklists
  1005.  
  1006. Prismatic Lyonar
  1007. [name:prismatic combo][{"id":1},{"id":20120},{"id":20120},{"id":20120},{"id":20158},{"id":20158},{"id":20158},{"id":20161},{"id":21},{"id":21},{"id":20068},{"id":20068},{"id":10981},{"id":10981},{"id":10981},{"id":9},{"id":9},{"id":9},{"id":10304},{"id":10304},{"id":10304},{"id":20090},{"id":20090},{"id":10303},{"id":10303},{"id":10303},{"id":11},{"id":11},{"id":11},{"id":10975},{"id":10975},{"id":10975},{"id":20067},{"id":20067},{"id":20067},{"id":10305},{"id":10305},{"id":10305},{"id":17},{"id":17}]
  1008.  
  1009. Vetruvian
  1010. Vet Mech
  1011. [name:mech][{"id":201},{"id":19002},{"id":19002},{"id":19002},{"id":20095},{"id":20095},{"id":20095},{"id":11017},{"id":11017},{"id":11017},{"id":213},{"id":213},{"id":213},{"id":20096},{"id":20096},{"id":20096},{"id":19003},{"id":19003},{"id":19003},{"id":10304},{"id":10304},{"id":19004},{"id":19004},{"id":19004},{"id":20153},{"id":20153},{"id":19049},{"id":19049},{"id":19005},{"id":19005},{"id":19005},{"id":19006},{"id":19042},{"id":10959},{"id":10959},{"id":20105},{"id":20105},{"id":220},{"id":220},{"id":220}]
  1012.  
  1013. Prismatic Vet
  1014. [name:vet prism][{"id":201},{"id":20073},{"id":20073},{"id":20095},{"id":20095},{"id":20095},{"id":20151},{"id":20151},{"id":20074},{"id":10302},{"id":10302},{"id":213},{"id":213},{"id":213},{"id":20099},{"id":20099},{"id":20096},{"id":20096},{"id":20096},{"id":10304},{"id":10304},{"id":10304},{"id":20153},{"id":20153},{"id":20153},{"id":221},{"id":221},{"id":221},{"id":10303},{"id":10303},{"id":10303},{"id":10975},{"id":10975},{"id":20077},{"id":20077},{"id":20105},{"id":20105},{"id":220},{"id":220},{"id":220}]
  1015.  
  1016. Songhai
  1017. Card Advantage
  1018. [name:CA][{"id":101},{"id":108},{"id":108},{"id":108},{"id":20102},{"id":20102},{"id":20080},{"id":20080},{"id":20080},{"id":10981},{"id":10981},{"id":10981},{"id":110},{"id":110},{"id":110},{"id":20081},{"id":20081},{"id":20081},{"id":121},{"id":121},{"id":121},{"id":10304},{"id":10304},{"id":112},{"id":112},{"id":112},{"id":20168},{"id":20168},{"id":20168},{"id":122},{"id":122},{"id":122},{"id":11008},{"id":11008},{"id":11008},{"id":20082},{"id":20082},{"id":20082},{"id":111},{"id":111}]
  1019.  
  1020. Arcanyst
  1021. [name:arcanyst][{"id":101},{"id":20085},{"id":20085},{"id":20085},{"id":20102},{"id":20102},{"id":20080},{"id":20080},{"id":20080},{"id":115},{"id":115},{"id":20081},{"id":20081},{"id":20081},{"id":121},{"id":121},{"id":121},{"id":10304},{"id":10304},{"id":10304},{"id":20168},{"id":20168},{"id":10303},{"id":10303},{"id":10303},{"id":20082},{"id":20082},{"id":20082},{"id":116},{"id":116},{"id":116},{"id":10306},{"id":10305},{"id":10305},{"id":10305},{"id":20155},{"id":20155},{"id":19043},{"id":19043},{"id":19043}]
  1022.  
  1023. Thoughts
  1024.  
  1025. Songhai
  1026. Just wanted to give some thoughts on some Songhai cards
  1027.  
  1028. Ancestral Divination – I like this card and don’t really think it needs to be changed, but I wanted to point out that it might slightly more difficult to capitalize on with the meerkat rules. Drawing cards is obviously awesome, but in order to reap value from this AD, a player must sandbag a creature or two. This seems harder with the new rules. I have a deck on live that centers on this card, but so far it hasn’t worked very well on this version.
  1029.  
  1030. Mistwalking –Mistwalking was never a powerful card; it was always a niche role player in a specific archetype. Now, (a) the overall requirement for power-per-card has gone up, which makes Mistwalking less likely to see play, and (b) the nerf to Mask of Shadows* makes the aforementioned archetype not nearly as powerful. These both suggest to me that Mistwalking might be too weak at the moment.
  1031.  
  1032. Suggestion: I’m not sure what to do here. Taking on “draw a card” seems boring and potentially abusable, although that’s a tact we’ve taken with cards like Aegis Barrier so it’s not out of the question. Making it cost 0 seems overdone; there are already 3 other zero-cost. Adding additional movement(i.e. “teleport up to 3 spaces”) doesn’t seem to address the overall problem.
  1033.  
  1034. If I had to choose, I’d want to see about adding a “Draw a card”, although I think this ought to be tested to make sure it isn’t abusable.
  1035.  
  1036. Artifact Defiler – This card was never ever used on live and my assumption is that it will likewise never be used here either. The effect is SO specific. Bloodtear Alchemist takes off one durability from all artifacts; Rust crawler destroys an artifact entirely. Both of those cards also have a body in addition to their effect. About the only Defiler is more useful than just running one of the anti-tech cards mentioned above is when an opponent has multiple artifacts that have more than one durability. Perhaps the weirdest thing about this card is that it is specific to the faction that has the easiest time removing artifacts in the first place (Bloodrage Mask + Four Winds Magi, not to mention the plentiful burn in Songhai).
  1037.  
  1038. Suggestion: Barring a complete overhaul of the card, it might be worthwhile to move to a different faction entirely, e.g. Magmar, that otherwise has a difficult time removing artifacts.
  1039.  
  1040. Eight Gates – If you’ve read the forums/reddit at all, you’ll know I have an intense hatred for Eight Gates. It really does not do enough for either its mana cost or the opportunity cost of a card drawn. There aren’t enough spells that deal damage to really make it worthwhile. With Eight Gates + Spiral Technique now impossible without some outside help, that leaves only Phoenix Fire, Ghost Lightning, and Twin Strike as options. I have tried to play Eigth Gates in a variety of decks—sometimes as three-ofs, sometimes as one-ofs—and have always regretted it. It was never worth the place in my deck, even in a dedicated “Spell” deck. It’s a high-risk, low-reward card.
  1041.  
  1042. Suggestion: I’d love to see something that would make Eight Gates at least playable without another spell damage card. Perhaps “Other spells you cast this turn that deal damage deal +2 damage. Deal 1 damage to a minion”. This would (a) make Eight Gates at least not worthless by itself (I understand maybe that’s something you’d like. If it is, I disagree with that direction) and (b) have an interesting interaction with other Eight Gates.
  1043.  
  1044. Mask of Shadows – I’ve been underwhelmed by MoS in its new form. I’m interested to see if it can make a resurgence after folks stop worrying about covering their backs, but I’m not sold. The nerf to Silhouette Tracer strikes me as making it even weaker.
  1045.  
  1046. Suggestion: I would be disappointed if backstab Songhai was no longer viable, as it seems like a very flavorful and unique archetype. Hopefully, the deck is one that can come and go in the meta when folks are not expecting it. I worry that the power level of MoS might have been too greatly reduced, and I lament the loss of synergy with Cyclone Mask. Even though others clearly did not like it, I think a balance of +1 Attack would have been a nice compromise; it would at least suggest some sort of interaction between the two cards.
  1047.  
  1048. Tusk Boar – I doubt that you guys are looking to decrease the power of Tusk Boar, but if you were interested, I have some suggestions that leave the cost and stats intact.
  1049.  
  1050.  
  1051.  
  1052.  
  1053.  
  1054.  
  1055.  
  1056.  
  1057. TheScientist
  1058.  
  1059. Decklists:
  1060.  
  1061. Feedback:
  1062.  
  1063. Monday, March 28th, 2016:
  1064. [Context - the followin is based upon 10 games played over previous week but more importantly a serious review of collection and cards I have seen played since meercat testing began.]
  1065.  
  1066. Card Diversity: This segment will focus entirely on card diversity as it will be played on meercat will go live. My initial impression has been that the card diversity will increase once the 1 card draw mechanic is implemented. I no longer believe this to be the case. My previous impressions came from the concept that control would be stronger than aggro. I noted in-faction 5+ drops and some neutrals were being played since their value exceeded lower drops. A 6 drop is significantly more powerful than a 2 drop + a 4 drop (vorpal reaver > Emerald rejuvenator + young silithar). I believed 1 card drawn per turn would force the game into a value battle. I should have been tipped that this was incorrect when all my game were ending at 8 +/- 1 mana - considerably faster than the live version. The conclusions I have drawn from this is that pushing one’s own agenda is stronger than attempting to have the correct answer at the correct time. Having the correct answer is when fewer cards are seen is even more difficult. Having few comeback mechanics (healing is poor / tempo cards are not standalone good anymore and can’t be reliably drawn [although this must be explored more thoroughly]) makes early board leads quite important. Mana acceleration is more powerful than ever because of the decrease in frequency of answers. Golem metallurgist, flash reincarnation, and mana tiles are the most notable means of accelerating threats. I consider each of these features to be ‘broken’ in this format. The one consistent form of acceleration is the mana tiles, which requires low costed cards to be played (particularly 2 drops). From my own testing I have found 3 drops to be useful since the power level of 4 drops has diminished greatly with changes to Rejuvenator and Twilight Sorcerer but 3 drops are still too clunky when they compose more than 9 slots in the deck (6 is typically best under new format). I predict those 6 spots will be dedicated to 3x spelljammer and 3x blazehound at the highest level because the power level of those cards is significantly greater than nearly every other 3 drop (Silverguard knight is the most notable exception - fenrir must be tested more but is probably still an exception as well because it is sticky and gives a body that grab a tile). As aggro becomes the standard - there are still a limited number of viable cards at each mana position. Mystic + Primus will be as prevalent as on live version. Factions with good in faction 2 and 4 drops will have a significant advantage over other factions as the neutral 4 drops feel weak now. Magmar / lyonar / songhai come to mind as my prediction for the most powerful factions in the initial meta game. Returning to the issue of card diversity, it is necessary to understand the 2/4 theory - that I believe this theory still holds - and the importance of mana acceleration in justifying a comparable inclusion of 2 drops to the live version of duelyst. The 5 slot will still be dominated by dancing blades and zen’rui on the neutral side which are stand alone valuable. The 6 slot will be archon and nothing else except in lyonar and abyssian (vetruvian is likely too weak but if played will feature Aymara since provoke will be a powerful mechanic). This reduces each deck to the most powerful in faction spells, which will be optimized quickly, the relevant in-faction minions which are already played for the most part (suntide maiden will make it into meta though :D ), and the last few neutral minions which will define the deck as aggro or midrange.
  1067.  
  1068. **** I Write all of this with the caveat that as players draw only 1 card per turn and games are shorter / fewer cards drawn per turn - it will take significantly longer for all these permutations to be played out. For players that learn by watching or first hand experience only - the game will likely feel like a gradual evolution. The game and meta will evolve in a slower fashion than before and will be pushed by a few individuals even more so than now.
  1069.  
  1070. **** Precise understanding of optimal builds and play will take longer to understand than in live version because of increased variance (see previous write-ups) allowing weaker play and decks to win against optimal decks and play at a concerning frequency.
  1071.  
  1072. Thank you for reading. Any comments or concerns please contact me directly.
  1073.  
  1074. Monday, March 21st, 2016:
  1075. [Context - The following is based upon 40 games played over previous week and a half - including multiple games with each faction. I will include specific notes on cards I find overpowered in the test server version relevant at this moment. There are too many underpowered cards to note individually. Thank you for your attention.]
  1076.  
  1077. Overall impression: My views of the 1 card draw mechanic have shifted towards a more positive role than I had previously expressed. I still feel the change robs the game of certain skill elements due to a fundamental decrease in decision making opportunities. From my experience games are ending at 8 or 9 mana quite consistently no matter the deck design. This is shorter than games I experience on the live version. Given the single draw per turn - the additional 2 starting cards does not compensate for the amount of cards seen throughout a game. By my estimates players see approximately 6 - 8 fewer drawn cards per game under the new mechanic and players also experience 2-3 fewer replaces (these numbers become quite a bit more dramatic if one plays Lyonar / Magmar / Vetruvian regularly). My interpretation of this change is that randomness from card draw has a greater opportunity to impact the game. Furthermore the consistency with which card combinations can be played together (imo one of the more fun elements of the game) goes down greatly. For example: Eight gates + ghost lightning, Jax + razorback (live version), demonic lure + grasp of agony, Dunecaster + Scion’s Third Wish, Metamorphosis + Flash Reincarnation + Spirit Harvester. Realistically every card in the deck must have stand alone value or will be a liability more often than not. Combination decks (and even 2 card combo plays) are dead until more reliable card draw is instituted. Having noted the salient negatives I would also like to acknowledge some of the positives from this change. Some of these positives are features I find personally enjoyable or I know to be in line with Counterplay’s objectives given my discussions with various developers. The games are faster and no longer do we have 40 minute Lyonar mirrors - instead the game is fast-paced as it advertises itself. The games are less homogenous; This change is due partly to seeing fewer cards per game and having greatly diversity in curve design. One caveat I would like to have acknowledged is that this may not hold true once the game is explored more. I have played far too few games to properly grasp what the eventual meta will look like. I expect the overall diversity of played cards will increase slightly as fewer 2 drops are used, more 3 drops are played, and decks can reliably add faction specific or powerful late game plays. I hesitate to say that synergistic power cards will be included since, as I stated above, I believe every card must maintain stand alone value to warrant inclusion at this time. These changes I believe will also reinvigorate a significant portion of the player base because of its novelty. I feel card expansions would serve a similar purpose but maybe once released will be synergistic and exceed the sum of the individual changes. The change increases future design space since a greater variety of mana slots are used for cards than previously before. I maintain the 2/4 theory (ask me if you don’t know what I am talking about) is an optimal strategy on the live version and thereby limits design space for 3 and 5+ mana cards. I have yet to fully explore this theory on the test version but the strongest draw cards seem to be at 3 mana making an aggro strategy premised on 2/4 unviable.
  1078.  
  1079. Fundamental changes I feel would add depth to the game:
  1080. 1. Adequate healing - The rejuvenator change no longer seems justified - the card is too weak given its mana cost.
  1081. 2. Additional general life - With fewer cards (answers) seen throughout a game, comeback potential feels incredibly small under the new format. Better healing or more life offer an additional turn to LOOK for the correct cards. I say look since there is no guarantee of finding but the ability to be responsive in this format is underwhelming. Pushing one’s own agenda has always been a powerful tool in duelyst but each faction had opportunities to make swing turns that the test format does not support (largely from what cards are playable. I would also like to note many swing turns relied on specific 2 card combos, which as stated above, is not justified in this format).
  1082.  
  1083. Overpowered cards:
  1084. Lantern Fox
  1085. Spiral Technique
  1086. Hexblade
  1087. Reaper of the Nine Moons
  1088. Natural Selection
  1089. Songweaver
  1090. Blistering Scorn
  1091. Archon Spellbinder
  1092. E’xun
  1093.  
  1094. Please contact me directly if there are further thoughts that would be useful to document. Thank you.
  1095.  
  1096.  
  1097.  
  1098. Friday, March 11th, 2016:
  1099.  
  1100. [Context - The following is based upon approximately 30 games played since March 10th updates - including at least 3 games with each faction. I will reserve my opinions are individual card balances given the new format until all 70+ changes are rolled out. The significance of each card must be taken in its greater context.]
  1101.  
  1102. 1. Draw 1 card per turn mechanic:
  1103. a. Length of games - 80% of my games have ended at 8 or 9 mana precisely. Only 2 games have not ended within 7 to [10] mana.
  1104. b. Cards seen per game - Given games last on average 7 turns total - I see 4 in opening hand + 6 draws + 6 replaces (most often) - allowing me to experience 16/39 cards from my deck - or approximately 40% in a given game given unique replaces.
  1105. c. Minion survival on field - Given that minion survival is not a zero sum game (the fun of both players combined is increased as more and interesting minions survive) it is beneficial to create a game where chances of a minion surviving are increased. Given that the current style of play promotes stickier and more powerful minions that do not die to a general attack - minions are on average more likely to survive. Fewer cards also means fewer removal options both in deck design and in hand.
  1106. d. Homogeneity of games - A recognized complaint of the live version of duelyst is a homogeneity to games given the necessity to play certain neutral minions and unvaried win conditions (healing mystic into jaxi + primus fist into emerald rejuvenator and so forth). This is likely a byproduct of drawing 2 cards per turn with a replace that is permissive to deck designs built around consistently achieving 1 or 2 win conditions (Jax truesight into razorback). There is significantly less homogeneity to the test version of duelyst. Games typically take the course of playing whatever single option you have on curve and aggressively mulling for single target removal (answers) and large threats of your own. For example - Going second if my opening hand features a 3 drop, a 4 drop, and a 2 drop + removal: I will mull away only the 2 drop with the expectation I will play 3 on curve at 3 and 4 and will aggressively replace / use to draws to look for an on curve 5 and 6 mana play. Given the abundance of 3 / 4 / 5 drops in deck necessary to make most powerful on curve plays each turn - there is variety in the permutations played each game.
  1107. e. Decisions to be made each turn - The decisions to be made each turn has been effectively reduced to 0. The necessity of playing value minions on curve (a 5 mana card is stronger than a 2 mana + 3 mana card, 6 > 2+4, etc.) simplifies the game to finding the correct positioning for a single card played this turn (not difficult when there are a limited number of things to play around) and choosing which card to replace (essentially always your lowest costed card from 4 mana forwards: If I have a decent number of 5+ drops in my Lyonar deck I will never want to play a silverguard night after 4 mana for the rest of the game even though it is a good card for its mana cost). Fewer minions minions on board also equates to fewer interactions that need to be anticipated + sequenced. The live version of duelyst has a great example: primus fist. This card is often used for complex lethals and positioning the turn before trading is very important. Now when I play reaper of the nine moons or artifact hunter or emerald rejuvenator or other 4 / 5 mana card I simply prevent its susceptibility to dancing blades. Rush minions like Spectral Revenant can not be played around. One notable exception is Elyx Stormblade but the frequency of games both seeing the card and having it matter is miniscule to the point of being irrelevant. There are significantly fewer opportunities for good players to distinguish themselves. Technical lines of play are now significantly outweighed by having the most powerful minions on curve (i.e. It didn’t matter that my opponent didn’t play around dancing blades on 5 since you can’t keep it in your opening hand and only saw 6 unique cards since then but they had vorpal reaver on 6 and I didn’t have Elyx to respond and the value / tempo loss from that interaction is nearly insurmountable).
  1108. f. Viability of cards - Cards that were previously unplayable are now playable because of the shift towards value / late game. Certain cards need to be rebalanced for this (reaper of the nine moons) but principally the card pool has changed. Tech cards and low cost cards are essentially unplayable now. By my estimates the total pool of playable cards has increased moderately.
  1109. g. Viability of styles of play - Given the current test version only midrange and value decks are possible. Decks are centered on
  1110. h. Predicted optimal strategies - Deck design that promotes consistency for strong on curve plays and counters other strongest decks will become ubiquitous.
  1111. i. Barrier to entry - The barrier to entry is much lower than before. As there are fewer card to card interactions and fewer positioning decisions to be made - along with fewer options for replacement - A near optimal play can be made each turn without much experience or insight. The average user will experience a greatly increased opportunity in defeating a more skilled opponent than in the live version of the game.
  1112. j. Overall user experience - For the average user the new game will likely be more fun and a longer standing component of their gaming repertoire due to increased card pool (since legendaries and epics have been MUCH more important and this gives players a collection to work towards) and decreased homogeneity to games. For myself - I feel multiple skill components of the game have been largely removed (the suggestions below aim to address this). A linear style of play and thinking makes RNG through card draw the central tenant of the game instead of a fringe component I see it as now.
  1113. k. Principle suggestions for balance / fun / decision making - Increasing healing potential, increasing general life total, and decreasing overall power of 5+ cost cards would add approximately 2 or 3 turns per game that would make not having most powerful cards on curve determine the game at 5, 6 and 7 mana. Giving players a starting hand of 5 would increase options for replacing each turn and for choosing from multiple on curve plays. More total resources would further the potential of aggro / midrange lists which are completely unplayable in the test version due lack of resources. 2 replaces per turn would also give players more control over the outcomes of their games and understanding which specific cards to look forward (as well as math behind replace mechanics) could further the skill component of the game.
Add Comment
Please, Sign In to add comment
Public Pastes
We use cookies for various purposes including analytics. By continuing to use Pastebin, you agree to our use of cookies as described in the Cookies Policy.  OK, I Understand
Not a member of Pastebin yet?
Sign Up, it unlocks many cool features!